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.

10.1111/anae.15115 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/anae.15115 C7273017!7273017 !32397008     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\32397008 .jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117       Anaesthesia 2020 ; 75 (8 ): 1014-1021 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=32397008 |t=2020. The aerosol box for intubation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients: an in-situ simulation crossover study |pdf=|usr=}}{{32397008 }} gab.com Text The aerosol box for intubation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients: an in-situ simulation crossover study JO: Anaesthesia http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32397008 #FOAvip The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to the manufacturing of novel devices to protect clinicians from the risk of transmission, including the aerosol box for use during tracheal intubation. We evaluated the impact of two aerosol boxes (an early-generation box and a latest-generation box) on intubations in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 with an in-situ simulation crossover study. The simulated process complied with the Safe Airway Society coronavirus disease 2019 airway management guidelines. The primary outcome was intubation time; secondary outcomes included first-pass success and breaches to personal protective equipment. All intubations were performed by specialist (consultant) anaesthetists and video recorded. Twelve anaesthetists performed 36 intubations. Intubation time with no aerosol box was significantly shorter than with the early-generation box (median (IQR [range]) 42.9 (32.9-46.9 [30.9-57.6])s vs. 82.1 (45.1-98.3 [30.8-180.0])s p = 0.002) and the latest-generation box (52.4 (43.1-70.3 [35.7-169.2])s, p = 0.008). No intubations without a box took more than 1 min, whereas 14 (58%) intubations with a box took over 1 min and 4 (17%) took over 2 min (including one failure). Without an aerosol box, all anaesthetists obtained first-pass success. With the early-generation and latest-generation boxes, 9 (75%) and 10 (83%) participants obtained first-pass success, respectively. One breach of personal protective equipment occurred using the early-generation box and seven breaches occurred using the latest-generation box. Aerosol boxes may increase intubation times and therefore expose patients to the risk of hypoxia. They may cause damage to conventional personal protective equipment and therefore place clinicians at risk of infection. Further research is required before these devices can be considered safe for clinical use. Twit Text FOAVip The aerosol box for intubation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients: an in-situ simulation crossover study ????Anaesthesia http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32397008 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32397008 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|32397008 }}</ref> The aerosol box for intubation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients: an in-situ simulation crossover study #MMPMID32397008 Begley JL ; Lavery KE ; Nickson CP ; Brewster DJ Anaesthesia 2020[Aug]; 75 (8 ): 1014-1021 PMID32397008 show ga The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to the manufacturing of novel devices to protect clinicians from the risk of transmission, including the aerosol box for use during tracheal intubation. We evaluated the impact of two aerosol boxes (an early-generation box and a latest-generation box) on intubations in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 with an in-situ simulation crossover study. The simulated process complied with the Safe Airway Society coronavirus disease 2019 airway management guidelines. The primary outcome was intubation time; secondary outcomes included first-pass success and breaches to personal protective equipment. All intubations were performed by specialist (consultant) anaesthetists and video recorded. Twelve anaesthetists performed 36 intubations. Intubation time with no aerosol box was significantly shorter than with the early-generation box (median (IQR [range]) 42.9 (32.9-46.9 [30.9-57.6])s vs. 82.1 (45.1-98.3 [30.8-180.0])s p = 0.002) and the latest-generation box (52.4 (43.1-70.3 [35.7-169.2])s, p = 0.008). No intubations without a box took more than 1 min, whereas 14 (58%) intubations with a box took over 1 min and 4 (17%) took over 2 min (including one failure). Without an aerosol box, all anaesthetists obtained first-pass success. With the early-generation and latest-generation boxes, 9 (75%) and 10 (83%) participants obtained first-pass success, respectively. One breach of personal protective equipment occurred using the early-generation box and seven breaches occurred using the latest-generation box. Aerosol boxes may increase intubation times and therefore expose patients to the risk of hypoxia. They may cause damage to conventional personal protective equipment and therefore place clinicians at risk of infection. Further research is required before these devices can be considered safe for clinical use. |*Betacoronavirus [MESH] |*Personal Protective Equipment [MESH] |Adult [MESH] |Aerosols [MESH] |Anesthesiologists [MESH] |COVID-19 [MESH] |Coronavirus Infections/*prevention & control/transmission [MESH] |Critical Care/methods [MESH] |Cross-Over Studies [MESH] |Equipment Design [MESH] |Female [MESH] |Humans [MESH] |Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/*prevention & control [MESH] |Intubation, Intratracheal/*instrumentation/methods [MESH] |Male [MESH] |Middle Aged [MESH] |Pandemics/*prevention & control [MESH] |Patient Simulation [MESH] |Pneumonia, Viral/*prevention & control/transmission [MESH]The aerosol box for intubation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients: a(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing