Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1111/anae.15188

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/anae.15188
suck pdf from google scholar
32559315!7323428!32559315
unlimited free pdf from europmc32559315    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=32559315&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215

suck abstract from ncbi

pmid32559315      Anaesthesia 2020 ; 75 (12): 1587-1595
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Measurement of airborne particle exposure during simulated tracheal intubation using various proposed aerosol containment devices during the COVID-19 pandemic #MMPMID32559315
  • Simpson JP; Wong DN; Verco L; Carter R; Dzidowski M; Chan PY
  • Anaesthesia 2020[Dec]; 75 (12): 1587-1595 PMID32559315show ga
  • The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the production of novel devices intended to protect airway managers during the aerosol-generating procedure of tracheal intubation. Using an in-situ simulation model, we evaluated laryngoscopist exposure of airborne particles sized 0.3 - 5.0 microns using five aerosol containment devices (aerosol box; sealed box with and without suction; vertical drape; and horizontal drape) compared with no aerosol containment device. Nebulised saline was used as the aerosol-generating model for 300 s, at which point, the devices were removed to assess particle spread. Primary outcome was the quantity and size of airborne particles measured at the level of the laryngoscopist's head at 30, 60, 120 and 300 s, as well as 360 s (60 s after device removal). Airborne particles sizes of 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 2.5 and 5.0 microns were quantified using an electronic airborne particle counter. Compared with no device use, the sealed intubation box with suction resulted in a decrease in 0.3, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.5 micron, but not 5.0 micron, particle exposure over all time-periods (p = 0.003 for all time periods). Compared with no device use, the aerosol box showed an increase in 1.0, 2.5 and 5.0 micron airborne particle exposure at 300 s (p = 0.002, 0.008, 0.002, respectively). Compared with no device use, neither horizontal nor vertical drapes showed any difference in any particle size exposure at any time. Finally, when the patient coughed, use of the aerosol box resulted in a marked increase in airborne particle exposure compared with other devices or no device use. In conclusion, novel devices intended to protect the laryngoscopist require objective testing to ensure they are fit for purpose and do not result in increased airborne particle exposure.
  • |*Aerosols[MESH]
  • |*Inhalation Exposure[MESH]
  • |*Particulate Matter[MESH]
  • |Airway Management/*methods[MESH]
  • |COVID-19[MESH]
  • |Coronavirus Infections/*prevention & control/*transmission[MESH]
  • |Cough[MESH]
  • |Humans[MESH]
  • |Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/*prevention & control[MESH]
  • |Intubation, Intratracheal/*instrumentation/*methods[MESH]
  • |Laryngoscopy[MESH]
  • |Nebulizers and Vaporizers[MESH]
  • |Pandemics/*prevention & control[MESH]
  • |Particle Size[MESH]
  • |Personal Protective Equipment[MESH]
  • |Pneumonia, Viral/*prevention & control/*transmission[MESH]
  • |Prospective Studies[MESH]


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box