BACKGROUND: There are several types of emergent zipper release methods described. The standard method can be difficult. The purpose of this study is to determine if an alternate method of zipper release can be easier to accomplish. METHODS: Subjects were provided with zippers and were taught 2 methods of emergent zipper release using a standard method (cutting the median bar of the actuator) and an alternate method (cutting the closed teeth of the zipper). The elapsed times to successful zipper release for both methods were measured. RESULTS: Mean zipper release times were faster for the alternate method (10.5 seconds) compared with the standard method (75.8 seconds) ( P < .001). CONCLUSION: The alternate method of zipper release is faster and easier than the standard method of zipper release; however, the optimal procedure is also dependent on the location of the entrapped tissue relative to the zipper actuator and the type of zipper.
BACKGROUND: There are several types of emergent zipper release methods described. The standard method can be difficult. The purpose of this study is to determine if an alternate method of zipper release can be easier to accomplish. METHODS: Subjects were provided with zippers and were taught 2 methods of emergent zipper release using a standard method (cutting the median bar of the actuator) and an alternate method (cutting the closed teeth of the zipper). The elapsed times to successful zipper release for both methods were measured. RESULTS: Mean zipper release times were faster for the alternate method (10.5 seconds) compared with the standard method (75.8 seconds) ( P < .001). CONCLUSION: The alternate method of zipper release is faster and easier than the standard method of zipper release; however, the optimal procedure is also dependent on the location of the entrapped tissue relative to the zipper actuator and the type of zipper.
Authors: Herman S Bagga; Gregory E Tasian; Patrick B Fisher; Charles E McCulloch; Jack W McAninch; Benjamin N Breyer Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-11-02 Impact factor: 7.450