Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39659527›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2024

Evaluation of efficacy of two bag-mask ventilation techniques by novice airway providers: Two-handed CE versus dominant-hand CE-non-dominant-hand thenar eminence techniques - A randomised controlled trial.

Neetu Saroye, Gurpreeti Kaur, Udeyana Singh, Anju Grewal, Akshita Khanna, Rushal Nayyar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Neetu SaroyeDepartment of Anaesthesiology, SHC (Subsidiary Health Centre) Ghurka, Jalandhar, Punjab, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0584-8282
Gurpreeti KaurDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3872-8887
Udeyana SinghDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0075-4316
Anju GrewalDepartment of Anaesthesiology, AIIMS Bathinda, Punjab, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2836-7301
Akshita KhannaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2165-1152
Rushal NayyarAnaesthesiology, Apollo Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-0839-8711

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: The conventional CE clamp technique may not effectively provide bag-mask ventilation (BMV) in the hands of inexperienced providers. Hence, we compared the efficacy of two-handed CE versus a hybrid technique. Methods: One hundred thirty-two American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II adult patients were randomised into groups A and B. After induction of anaesthesia and neuromuscular blockade, Group A received BMV by using the double-handed CE technique. Group B received BMV by using dominant-hand CE and non-dominant-hand thenar eminence (TE) hybrid technique. The primary outcome was two minute (24 breaths) mean exhaled tidal volume. Secondary outcomes were the number of failed breaths and the comfortability level of airway providers using a 5-point Likert scale. Data were analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test, Student Results: The mean exhaled tidal volume and end-tidal carbon dioxide observed in Group A were significantly lower than in Group B ( Conclusion: The dominant-hand CE and non-dominant-hand TE techniques provide higher exhaled tidal volumes with comparable provider comfortability and may be considered an alternate BMV technique.

Indexed as

Bag-mask ventilationdouble-handed CE techniqueend-tidal carbon dioxideexhaled tidal volumehybrid bag-mask ventilation technique

Identifiers

PMID39659527
PMCPMC11626873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.