Search

Aim: The study aims to compare three commonly used neonatal resuscitation devices, the Laerdal self-inflating bag with a positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) valve, a T-piece resuscitator (T-piece) and a flow-inflating bag to provide peak inflation pressure (PIP) and PEEP., Methods: Participants were asked to use each device to give positive pressure ventilation to a modified neonatal mannequin via a face mask to achieve 40-60 inflations per minute, aiming for a PIP/PEEP of 30/5 cm H₂O. A manometer was visible to participants with each device. PIP, PEEP, percentage leak at the face mask and expired tidal volume were measured using a hot-wire anemometer. We analysed 20 inflations from each participant for each device., Results: Fifty participants provided PIP and PEEP with each device. The T-piece was the most accurate and consistent. The flow-inflating bag had the most variation. The leak was lowest with the self-inflating bag and PEEP and highest with the flow-inflating bag, but all had wide variation., Conclusion: Each device was able to provide PIP and PEEP when used appropriately. When compared with other resuscitation devices, the T-piece provided the most accurate and consistent PIP and PEEP., (© 2011 The Authors. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health © 2011 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (Royal Australasian College of Physicians).)

Background: Some national resuscitation guidelines advocate using sustained initial inflations (2-3 s) for babies requiring resuscitation. Inflation times ≥10 s have been used for preterm infants., Objectives: This study examines the ability of operators of varying experience to provide a sustained inflation using three different manual ventilation devices., Methods: We compared a self-inflating bag, a flow-inflating bag and a pressure-limited T-piece device. Fifty clinical staff members from five professional groups gave a sustained inflation with a target peak pressure of 30 cm H2O and target duration of 10 s to an internal leak-free manikin. We measured peak inflating pressure (PIP) and mean inflating pressure (MIP) during the sustained inflation, and the duration of inflating pressure (IP) >20 and 25 cm H2O., Results: Median (IQR) duration of IP >25 cm H2O was: self-inflating bag 2.5 s (0.8-5.7), flow-inflating bag 10.6 s (8.4-12.9) and the T-piece 10.7 s (8.9-11.9). There was a weak correlation between experience using a self-inflating bag and longer inflation times (R = 0.290, p = 0.041). When compared with the T-piece, the flow-inflating bag had lower mean MIP (27.0 ± 1.8 vs. 28.8 ± 2.0 cm H2O) and higher mean PIP (32.3 ± 3.7 vs. 29.8 ± 1.8 cm H2O). There were no differences in performance between operator groups., Conclusion: The T-piece provided consistent PIP during a single 10 s sustained inflation with less variation in pressure compared with the flow-inflating bag. Sustained inflations >3 s were difficult to achieve with a self-inflating bag., (Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.)