Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMark, Julian
dc.contributor.authorWalker, Alison
dc.contributor.authorDavey, Christine
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-11T16:24:31Z
dc.date.available2020-02-11T16:24:31Z
dc.date.issued2011-08
dc.identifier.citationMark, J. and Walker, A. and Davey, C., 2011. A mannequin study comparing suitability of the i-gel™ with a laryngeal mask airway device. Journal of Paramedic Practice, 3 (8), 442-446.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1759-1376
dc.identifier.issn2041-9457
dc.identifier.doi10.12968/jpar.2011.3.8.442
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12417/749
dc.description.abstractAbstract published with permission. Objectives: To compare the suitability of the i-gel™ (Intersurgical Ltd, UK) supraglottic airway device with a single-use laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in the hazardous area response team (HART) environment and the urban search and rescue (USAR) environment. Method: five chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear trained urban search and rescue paramedics attempted five insertions of each supraglottic airway device into a Laerdal® ALS mannequin (Laerdal, Norway) in three separate environments: normal (supine, waist high), HART (wearing gas-tight suits and respirators) and USAR (in a simulated confined space). As a control group, five anaesthetists also attempted five insertions of each supraglottic airway device into a Laerdal® Airway Trainer (Laerdal, Norway) under normal conditions. Time from first touching the device to successful inflation of the mannequin's lungs’ using a self-inflating bag-valve device was recorded and operator opinion was captured using a four-point Likert scale. Results: insertion of the i-gel airway was significantly faster than insertion of the LMA in simulated USAR conditions (P<0.001), there was no significant difference in control conditions or when wearing gas-tight personal protective equipment. There was no difference in the number of attempts required to achieve correct placement of either supraglottic airway device in any situation. Conclusions: this study has demonstrated that, in simulated USAR conditions, the i-gel supraglottic airway device performs at least as well as the LMA and is significantly quicker to insert. The authors therefore recommend that the i-gel is introduced into the USAR HART environment with further clinical evaluation in this and other prehospital settings.
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectEmergency Medical Servicesen_US
dc.subjectResuscitationen_US
dc.subjectLaryngeal Masksen_US
dc.subjectManikinsen_US
dc.subjectConfined Spacesen_US
dc.titleA mannequin study comparing suitability of the i-gel™ with a laryngeal mask airway deviceen_US
dc.typeJournal Article/Review
dc.source.journaltitleJournal of Paramedic Practiceen_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2020-02-05
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2020-02-05
refterms.panelUnspecifieden_US
refterms.dateFirstOnline2013-08
html.description.abstractAbstract published with permission. Objectives: To compare the suitability of the i-gel™ (Intersurgical Ltd, UK) supraglottic airway device with a single-use laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in the hazardous area response team (HART) environment and the urban search and rescue (USAR) environment. Method: five chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear trained urban search and rescue paramedics attempted five insertions of each supraglottic airway device into a Laerdal® ALS mannequin (Laerdal, Norway) in three separate environments: normal (supine, waist high), HART (wearing gas-tight suits and respirators) and USAR (in a simulated confined space). As a control group, five anaesthetists also attempted five insertions of each supraglottic airway device into a Laerdal® Airway Trainer (Laerdal, Norway) under normal conditions. Time from first touching the device to successful inflation of the mannequin's lungs’ using a self-inflating bag-valve device was recorded and operator opinion was captured using a four-point Likert scale. Results: insertion of the i-gel airway was significantly faster than insertion of the LMA in simulated USAR conditions (P<0.001), there was no significant difference in control conditions or when wearing gas-tight personal protective equipment. There was no difference in the number of attempts required to achieve correct placement of either supraglottic airway device in any situation. Conclusions: this study has demonstrated that, in simulated USAR conditions, the i-gel supraglottic airway device performs at least as well as the LMA and is significantly quicker to insert. The authors therefore recommend that the i-gel is introduced into the USAR HART environment with further clinical evaluation in this and other prehospital settings.en_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record