These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32205331)
1. Endotracheal tube fixation time: a comparison of three fixation methods in a military field scenario. Epstein D; Strashewsky R; Furer A; Tsur AM; Chen J; Lehavi A BMJ Mil Health; 2022 Apr; 168(2):109-111. PubMed ID: 32205331 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of the effectiveness of endotracheal tube holder with the conventional method in a manikin model. Suttapanit K; Yuksen C; Aramvanitch K; Meemongkol T; Chandech A; Songkathee B; Nuanprom P Turk J Emerg Med; 2020; 20(4):175-179. PubMed ID: 33089025 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of techniques for securing the endotracheal tube while wearing chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear protection: a manikin study. Castle N; Owen R; Clark S; Hann M; Reeces D; Gurney I Prehosp Disaster Med; 2010; 25(6):589-94. PubMed ID: 21181696 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of tape-tying versus a tube-holding device for securing endotracheal tubes in adults. Murdoch E; Holdgate A Anaesth Intensive Care; 2007 Oct; 35(5):730-5. PubMed ID: 17933160 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of the Effectiveness of Two Types of Commercial Endotracheal Tube Holders, with the Conventional Method in a Manikin Model. Nasr Isfahani M; Abootalebi A; Ghaznavi K; Kamali Dolatabadi L Adv Biomed Res; 2023; 12():30. PubMed ID: 37057224 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Extubation force: a comparison of adhesive tape, non-adhesive tape and a commercial endotracheal tube holder. Owen R; Castle N; Hann H; Reeves D; Naidoo R; Naidoo S Resuscitation; 2009 Nov; 80(11):1296-300. PubMed ID: 19726121 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Shifts in endotracheal tube position due to chest compressions: a simulation comparison by fixation method. Komasawa N; Fujiwara S; Miyazaki S; Ohchi F; Minami T J Emerg Med; 2015 Feb; 48(2):241-6. PubMed ID: 25440458 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effect of airway-securing method on prehospital endotracheal tube dislodgment. Kupas DF; Kauffman KF; Wang HE Prehosp Emerg Care; 2010; 14(1):26-30. PubMed ID: 19947864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Airway ultrasound for the confirmation of endotracheal tube placement in cadavers by military flight medic trainees - A pilot study. Hanlin ER; Zelenak J; Barakat M; Anderson KL Am J Emerg Med; 2018 Sep; 36(9):1711-1714. PubMed ID: 29478724 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of four methods of endotracheal tube passage in simulated airways: There is room for improved techniques. Kingma K; Hofmeyr R; Zeng IS; Coomarasamy C; Brainard A Emerg Med Australas; 2017 Dec; 29(6):650-657. PubMed ID: 29113010 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ability of Critical Care Medics to Confirm Endotracheal Tube Placement by Ultrasound. Joyce M; Tozer J; Vitto M; Evans D Prehosp Disaster Med; 2020 Dec; 35(6):629-631. PubMed ID: 32838826 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The effect of adhesive tape versus endotracheal tube fastener in critically ill adults: the endotracheal tube securement (ETTS) randomized controlled trial. Landsperger JS; Byram JM; Lloyd BD; Rice TW; Crit Care; 2019 May; 23(1):161. PubMed ID: 31064406 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of the Force Required for Dislodgement Between Secured and Unsecured Airways. Davenport C; Martin-Gill C; Wang HE; Mayrose J; Carlson JN Prehosp Emerg Care; 2018; 22(6):778-781. PubMed ID: 29714527 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of 2 techniques of laryngeal tube exchange in a randomized controlled simulation study. Budde AO; Schwarz A; Dalal PG; Sinz EH; Vaida SJ Am J Emerg Med; 2015 Feb; 33(2):173-6. PubMed ID: 25481340 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Combat trauma airway management: endotracheal intubation versus laryngeal mask airway versus combitube use by Navy SEAL and Reconnaissance combat corpsmen. Calkins MD; Robinson TD J Trauma; 1999 May; 46(5):927-32. PubMed ID: 10338414 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparison of the King-LT to endotracheal intubation and Combitube in a simulated difficult airway. Russi CS; Miller L; Hartley MJ Prehosp Emerg Care; 2008; 12(1):35-41. PubMed ID: 18189175 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A Comparison of the Haider Tube-Guard® Endotracheal Tube Holder Versus Adhesive Tape to Determine if This Novel Device Can Reduce Endotracheal Tube Movement and Prevent Unplanned Extubation. Buckley JC; Brown AP; Shin JS; Rogers KM; Hoftman NN Anesth Analg; 2016 May; 122(5):1439-43. PubMed ID: 26983051 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Radiological evaluation of tube depth and complications of prehospital endotracheal intubation in pediatric trauma: a descriptive study. Simons T; Söderlund T; Handolin L Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg; 2017 Dec; 43(6):797-804. PubMed ID: 28130577 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]