ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Knowledge and skills of pediatric residents in managing pediatric foreign body airway obstruction using novel airway clearance devices in Spain: A randomized simulation trial.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The most common airway foreign bodies removed with an anti-choking suction device: a descriptive retrospective study.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Do We Actually Help Choking Children? The Quality of Evidence on the Effectiveness and Safety of First Aid Rescue Manoeuvres: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Recent emergence of airway clearance devices (ACDs) as a treatment alternative for foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO) lacks substantial evidence on efficacy and safety. This study aimed to assess pediatric residents' knowledge and skills in managing a simulated pediatric choking scenario, adhering to recommended protocols, and using LifeVac© and DeCHOKER© ACDs. Methods: Randomized controlled simulation trial, in which 60 pediatric residents from 3 different hospitals (median age 27 [25.0-29.9]; 76.7% female) were asked to solve an unannounced pediatric simulated choking scenario using three interventions to manage (randomized order): 1) following the recommended protocol of the European Resuscitation Council (encouraging to cough or combination of back blows and abdominal thrusts); 2) using LifeVac©; and 3) using DeCHOKER©. A Little Anne QCPR™ manikin (Laerdal Medical) was used. The variable compliance rate (%) was calculated according to the correct/incorrect execution of the steps constituting the proper actions for each test. Results: Participants demonstrated a correct compliance rate only ranging between 50-75% in following the recommended protocol for managing partial FBAO progressing to severe. Despite unfamiliarity with the ACDs, pediatric residents achieved rates between 75% and 100%, with no significant difference noted between the two devices ( Conclusions: Only a minority of pediatric residents were able to adhere to the recommended FBAO protocol, whereas 70% of them were able to adequately use the ACDs. However, since a significant proportion could not, it seems that ACDs themselves do not address all issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.