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


10.1097/ALN.0000000000003597

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1097/ALN.0000000000003597
suck pdf from google scholar
33125457!7687877!33125457
unlimited free pdf from europmc33125457    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi

pmid33125457      Anesthesiology 2021 ; 134 (1): 61-71
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Aerosol Retention Characteristics of Barrier Devices #MMPMID33125457
  • Fidler RL; Niedek CR; Teng JJ; Sturgeon ME; Zhang Q; Robinowitz DL; Hirsch J
  • Anesthesiology 2021[Jan]; 134 (1): 61-71 PMID33125457show ga
  • BACKGROUND: Disease severity in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be associated with inoculation dose. This has triggered interest in intubation barrier devices to block droplet exposure; however, aerosol protection with these devices is not known. This study hypothesized that barrier devices reduce aerosol outside of the barrier. METHODS: Aerosol containment in closed, semiclosed, semiopen, and open barrier devices was investigated: (1) "glove box" sealed with gloves and caudal drape, (2) "drape tent" with a drape placed over a frame, (3) "slit box" with armholes and caudal end covered by vinyl slit diaphragms, (4) original "aerosol box," (5) collapsible "interlocking box," (6) "simple drape" over the patient, and (7) "no barrier." Containment was investigated by (1) vapor instillation at manikin's right arm with video-assisted visual evaluation and (2) submicrometer ammonium sulfate aerosol particles ejected through the manikin's mouth with ventilation and coughs. Samples were taken from standardized locations inside and around the barriers using a particle counter and a mass spectrometer. Aerosol evacuation from the devices was measured using standard hospital suction, a surgical smoke evacuator, and a Shop-Vac. RESULTS: Vapor experiments demonstrated leakage via arm holes and edges. Only closed and semiclosed devices and the aerosol box reduced aerosol particle counts (median [25th, 75th percentile]) at the operator's mouth compared to no barrier (combined median 29 [-11, 56], n = 5 vs. 157 [151, 166], n = 5). The other barrier devices provided less reduction in particle counts (133 [128, 137], n = 5). Aerosol evacuation to baseline required 15 min with standard suction and the Shop-Vac and 5 min with a smoke evacuator. CONCLUSIONS: Barrier devices may reduce exposure to droplets and aerosol. With meticulous tucking, the glove box and drape tent can retain aerosol during airway management. Devices that are not fully enclosed may direct aerosol toward the laryngoscopist. Aerosol evacuation reduces aerosol content inside fully enclosed devices. Barrier devices must be used in conjunction with body-worn personal protective equipment.
  • |*Personal Protective Equipment[MESH]
  • |Aerosols/adverse effects/*analysis[MESH]
  • |COVID-19/*prevention & control[MESH]
  • |Cough/prevention & control/virology[MESH]
  • |Health Personnel[MESH]
  • |Humans[MESH]
  • |Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects[MESH]


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box