• Holger Herff, Peter Paal, Thomas Mitterlechner, Achim von Goedecke, Karl H Stadlbauer, Wolfgang G Voelckel, Angelika Zecha-Stallinger, and Volker Wenzel.
• Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Innsbruck Medical University, Anichstrasse 35, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria. holger.herff@i-med.ac.at
• Resuscitation. 2009 Oct 1;80(10):1142-6.

AimVentilation of a non-intubated emergency patient by inexperienced rescuers with a standard bag-valve device may result in high inspiratory flow rates and subsequently high airway pressures with stomach inflation. Therefore, a self-inflating bag has been developed that requires lay rescuers to blow up a single-use balloon inside an adult bag-valve device, which, in turn, displaces air within the bag towards the patient. This concept has been compared to standard adult bag-valve devices earlier in bench models but not in patients.MethodsAn anaesthetist who was blinded to all monitor tracings ventilated the lungs of 40 apnoeic patients during routine anaesthesia induction either with a standard bag-valve device or with the mouth-to-bag resuscitator in a random order. Study endpoints were peak inspiratory flow rates, peak airway pressure, tidal volumes and inspiratory time.ResultsPeak inspiratory flow was 40+/-10lmin(-1) for the standard bag-valve device versus 33+/-13lmin(-1) for the mouth-to-bag resuscitator (P<0.0001); peak airway pressure was 17+/-5cmH(2)O versus 14+/-5cmH(2)O (P<0.0001); inspiratory tidal volume was 477+/-133ml versus 644+/-248ml (P<0.001) and inspiratory time was 1.1+/-0.3s versus 1.9+/-0.6s (P<0.0001).ConclusionEmploying the mouth-to-bag resuscitator during simulated ventilation of a non-intubated patient in respiratory arrest significantly decreased peak inspiratory flow and peak airway pressure and increased inspiratory tidal volume and inspiratory times compared to a standard bag-valve device.

16 keywords...

hide…