NuMask Versus Traditional Mask Ventilation During Routine Care
Completed
- Conditions
- Apnea
- Registration Number
- NCT02828280
- Lead Sponsor
- Derek Sakata
- Brief Summary
The direct objective of this study is to determine whether an experienced provider can more adequately and/or easily ventilate an anesthetized patient with the NuMask device as compared to traditional bag-valve-mask ventilation. These are approved masks, being used in the patients routine care. The researchers believe that mean tidal volumes obtained by experienced providers when manually ventilating anesthetized patients with the NuMask device will be larger than when using the traditional bag-valve-mask.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 44
Inclusion Criteria
- 44 adults total
- ASA status I-III
- aged 18-64
- elective surgery at the University of Utah under general anesthesia
- Bearded, BMI >35 or edentulous
Exclusion Criteria
- ASA IV or higher
- Oropharyngeal or facial pathology
- Risk of aspiration (defined by need for rapid sequence intubation, uncontrolled gastroesophageal reflux disease)
- Known and/or documented difficulty placing an endotracheal tube in the past
- Limited neck extension or flexion
- Personal or familial history of malignant hyperthermia
- Known or predicted severe respiratory disease or compromise
- Pregnancy
Study & Design
- Study Type
- OBSERVATIONAL
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Tidal Volume comparison 2 minutes (one minute for NuMask, one minute for traditional mask) Tidal volumes delivered between the two devices will be compared
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Ease of use 2 minutes Provider will rate each device for ease of use on a 1-5 scale with 1 being easy and 5 being difficult.