Published in

Wiley, Anaesthesia: Peri-operative medicine, critical care and pain, 4(69), p. 343-347, 2014

DOI: 10.1111/anae.12545

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

A randomised crossover comparison of manikin ventilation through Soft Seal((R)) i-gel(TM) and AuraOnce(TM) supraglottic airway devices by surf lifeguards

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Forty surf lifeguards attempted to ventilate a manikin through one out of three supraglottic airways inserted in random order: the Portex(®) Soft Seal(®) ; the Intersurgical(®) i-gel™; and the Ambu(®) AuraOnce™. We recorded the time to ventilate and the proportion of inflations that were successful, without and then with concurrent chest compressions. The mean (SD) time to ventilate with the Soft Seal, i-gel and AuraOnce was 35.2 (7.2)s, 15.6 (3.3)s and 35.1 (8.5) s, respectively, p < 0.0001. Concurrent chest compression prolonged the time to ventilate by 5.0 (1.3-8.1)%, p = 0.0072. The rate of successful ventilations through the Soft Seal (100%) was more than through the AuraOnce (92%), p < 0.0001, neither of which was different from the i-gel (97%). The mean (SD) tidal volumes through the Soft Seal, i-gel and AuraOnce were 0.65 (0.14) l, 0.50 (0.16) l and 0.39 (0.19) l, respectively. Most lifeguards (85%) preferred the i-gel. Ventilation through supraglottic airway devices may be considered for resuscitation by surf lifeguards.