Original Research
Keep pushing! Limiting interruptions to CPR; bag-valve mask versus i-gel® airway ventilation
Submitted: 10 October 2017 | Published: 11 October 2016
About the author(s)
Craig Vincent-Lambert, Department of Emergency Medical Care, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, South AfricaAndrew Makkink, Department of Emergency Medical Care, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Fredrick Kloppers, Department of Emergency Medical Care, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Full Text:
PDF (1MB)Abstract
Objectives: This pilot study evaluated how interruptions to chest compressions or hands-off time (HOT) are affected by the placement of an i-gel® airway vs. simple BVM ventilation during single rescuer CPR.
Method: 16 participants performed two, ten-minute single rescuer CPR simulations, firstly using the BVM and later the i-gel® airway for ventilation. Data pertaining to ventilations and HOT in each scenario was statistically analysed and compared.
Results: The i-gel® airway demonstrated a superior ease of ventilation compared to BVM alone and resulted in a reduction of time spent on ventilations overall. The i-gel® however took a mean of 29 s, ± 10 s, to secure which contributes considerably to HOT.
Conclusion: The use of the i-gel® airway resulted in a considerable decrease in the amount of time spent on ventilations and in more compressions being performed. The overall reduction in HOT was, however, offset by the time it took to secure the device. Further investigation into the use and securing of the i-gel® airway in single rescuer CPR is recommended.
Keywords
Metrics
Total abstract views: 2962Total article views: 1146