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.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Evaluation of five adult disposable operator-powered resuscitators. Author: Barnes TA, Potash R. Journal: Respir Care; 1989 Apr; 34(4):254-61. PubMed ID: 10315774. Abstract: UNLABELLED: We evaluated the performance and safety of five adult disposable operator-powered resuscitators: BagEasy, Bag Mask Resuscitator, Pulmanex, 1st Response, and Stat Blue. METHOD: We tested the devices against the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard F-920-85. We tested each resuscitator by using it to ventilate a lung model, the Bio-Tek VT-1 Adult Ventilator Tester. RESULTS: All resuscitators met the requirements of VT 600 mL, f 20/min, and I:E less than 1:1. Standard F-920 specifies a fractional delivered O2 concentration (FDO2) greater than or equal to 0.85 with attachments and greater than or equal to 0.40 without attachments, at oxygen flows of 15 L/min and VE of 7.2 L (600 mL x 12). The Pulmanex with bag reservoir attached had a mean +/- SD FDO2 of 0.74 +/- 0.02, and the other four devices had an FDO2 of 0.93 +/- 0.02. Without attachments only the 1st Response and BagEasy had FDO2 greater than or equal to 0.40. All devices when disabled with simulated vomitus were restored to proper function within 20 s and were functional at O2 flow of 30 L/min. Only the Bag Mask Resuscitator did not pass the drop test. Only the Stat Blue did not pass the back-leak test. CONCLUSIONS: Although we do not have practical experience with these resuscitators, we conclude that only 1st Response and BagEasy meet the ASTM standard for operator-powered resuscitators and that, of the devices tested, only the 1st Response and BagEasy are acceptable replacements for permanent resuscitators.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]