ArticleResuscitation plus2025
Respiratory function monitors (RFMs) used for newborn resuscitation: accuracy and performance in the presence of leak. A bench comparison study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Use of respiratory function monitors (RFMs) during newborn resuscitation is not currently recommended by ILCOR. New-generation compact monitors have recently entered the market with portable designs offering better integration into clinical practice. Consensus on science regarding RFM use has been gained using complex legacy or research-only devices. This study aims to compare the accuracy and performance under leak conditions of two legacy RFMs with two new-generation monitors. Methods: The accuracy of new-generation RFMs (ResusRight-Juno, Monitvent-Neo100) were compared to legacy RFMs (Acutronics-Florian, Phillips-NM3) in the presence of imposed dynamic leaks (0 %, 20 %, 50 %, 90 %). Manual inflations using a Self-inflating bag (SIB) and T-piece Resuscitator (TPR) were delivered to a test lung (compliance 0.6 and 2 mL/cmH Results: Analysis of 1,920 inflations was performed. At zero leak, all RFMs performed with comparable accuracy for tidal volume, leak and pressure with minimal differences to reference measurements. System leak was accurately determined with tested RFMs at all levels. At 90 % system leak, RFM measured SIB-delivered volumes decreased significantly to <50 % compared with no leak; TPR-delivered volumes were less impacted and more accurate. Conclusion: The new-generation RFMs demonstrated comparable accuracy and performance to legacy devices at zero leak. All RFMs displayed accurate leak levels including 90 %. RFMs used with SIBs showed significantly reduced performance and accuracy at 90 % leak in contrast to TPR at 90% leak. New-generation RFMs simplified user interfaces may enhance benefits during clinical use.
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.