Cargando…

Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial

BACKGROUND: The brand-new anti-choking devices (LifeVac® and DeCHOKER®) have been recently developed to treat Foreign Body Airway Obstruction (FBAO). However, the scientific evidence around these devices that are available to the public is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the ability t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cardalda-Serantes, Borja, Carballo-Fazanes, Aida, Rodríguez-Ruiz, Emilio, Abelairas-Gómez, Cristian, Rodríguez-Núñez, Antonio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10204033/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37221498
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04345-7
_version_ 1785045755882373120
author Cardalda-Serantes, Borja
Carballo-Fazanes, Aida
Rodríguez-Ruiz, Emilio
Abelairas-Gómez, Cristian
Rodríguez-Núñez, Antonio
author_facet Cardalda-Serantes, Borja
Carballo-Fazanes, Aida
Rodríguez-Ruiz, Emilio
Abelairas-Gómez, Cristian
Rodríguez-Núñez, Antonio
author_sort Cardalda-Serantes, Borja
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The brand-new anti-choking devices (LifeVac® and DeCHOKER®) have been recently developed to treat Foreign Body Airway Obstruction (FBAO). However, the scientific evidence around these devices that are available to the public is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the ability to use the LifeVac® and DeCHOKER® devices in an adult FBAO simulated scenario, by untrained health science students. METHODS: Forty-three health science students were asked to solve an FBAO event in three simulated scenarios: 1) using the LifeVac®, 2) using the DeCHOKER®, and 3) following the recommendations of the current FBAO protocol. A simulation-based assessment was used to analyze the correct compliance rate in the three scenarios based on the correct execution of the required steps, and the time it took to complete each one. RESULTS: Participants achieved correct compliance rates between 80–100%, similar in both devices (p = 0.192). Overall test times were significantly shorter with LifeVac® than DeCHOKER® device (36.6 sec. [31.9–44.4] vs. 50.4 s [36.7–66.9], p < 0.001). Regarding the recommended protocol, a 50% correct compliance rate was obtained in those with prior training vs. 31.3% without training, (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Untrained health science students are able to quickly and adequately use the brand-new anti-choking devices but have more difficulties in applying the current recommended FBAO protocol.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10204033
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102040332023-05-24 Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial Cardalda-Serantes, Borja Carballo-Fazanes, Aida Rodríguez-Ruiz, Emilio Abelairas-Gómez, Cristian Rodríguez-Núñez, Antonio BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: The brand-new anti-choking devices (LifeVac® and DeCHOKER®) have been recently developed to treat Foreign Body Airway Obstruction (FBAO). However, the scientific evidence around these devices that are available to the public is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the ability to use the LifeVac® and DeCHOKER® devices in an adult FBAO simulated scenario, by untrained health science students. METHODS: Forty-three health science students were asked to solve an FBAO event in three simulated scenarios: 1) using the LifeVac®, 2) using the DeCHOKER®, and 3) following the recommendations of the current FBAO protocol. A simulation-based assessment was used to analyze the correct compliance rate in the three scenarios based on the correct execution of the required steps, and the time it took to complete each one. RESULTS: Participants achieved correct compliance rates between 80–100%, similar in both devices (p = 0.192). Overall test times were significantly shorter with LifeVac® than DeCHOKER® device (36.6 sec. [31.9–44.4] vs. 50.4 s [36.7–66.9], p < 0.001). Regarding the recommended protocol, a 50% correct compliance rate was obtained in those with prior training vs. 31.3% without training, (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Untrained health science students are able to quickly and adequately use the brand-new anti-choking devices but have more difficulties in applying the current recommended FBAO protocol. BioMed Central 2023-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10204033/ /pubmed/37221498 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04345-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Cardalda-Serantes, Borja
Carballo-Fazanes, Aida
Rodríguez-Ruiz, Emilio
Abelairas-Gómez, Cristian
Rodríguez-Núñez, Antonio
Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial
title Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial
title_full Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial
title_fullStr Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial
title_full_unstemmed Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial
title_short Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial
title_sort would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? a manikin crossover trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10204033/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37221498
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04345-7
work_keys_str_mv AT cardaldaserantesborja wouldantichokingdevicesbecorrectlyandquicklymanagedbyhealthsciencestudentsamanikincrossovertrial
AT carballofazanesaida wouldantichokingdevicesbecorrectlyandquicklymanagedbyhealthsciencestudentsamanikincrossovertrial
AT rodriguezruizemilio wouldantichokingdevicesbecorrectlyandquicklymanagedbyhealthsciencestudentsamanikincrossovertrial
AT abelairasgomezcristian wouldantichokingdevicesbecorrectlyandquicklymanagedbyhealthsciencestudentsamanikincrossovertrial
AT rodrigueznunezantonio wouldantichokingdevicesbecorrectlyandquicklymanagedbyhealthsciencestudentsamanikincrossovertrial