Literature DB >> 32243118

Barrier Enclosure during Endotracheal Intubation.

Robert Canelli1, Christopher W Connor2, Mauricio Gonzalez3, Ala Nozari3, Rafael Ortega3.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32243118      PMCID: PMC7151333          DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2007589

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor: Clinicians with inadequate access to standard personal protective equipment (PPE) have been compelled to improvise protective barrier enclosures for use during endotracheal intubation. We describe one such barrier that is easily fabricated and may help protect clinicians during this procedure. The barrier studied was an “aerosol box,”[1] which consists of a transparent plastic cube designed to cover a patient’s head and that incorporates two circular ports through which the clinician’s hands are passed to perform the airway procedure. The dimensions of the box are provided in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org. In our simulation (see video), a laryngoscopist, attired in standard PPE, took position at the head of an airway mannequin. To approximate a forceful cough and generate a spread of droplets and aerosols, a small latex balloon containing 10 ml of fluorescent dye was placed in the hypopharynx of the mannequin. The balloon was inflated with compressed oxygen that was run through tubing inside the mannequin until the balloon burst; the explosion of the balloon represented a crude simulation of a cough. We repeated the experiment without and with the aerosol box, and after each simulation, we illuminated the scene with ultraviolet light to visualize the spreading of the dye. With the use of PPE only, dye was found on the laryngoscopist’s gown, gloves, face mask, eye shield, hair, neck, ears, and shoes (Figure 1). Contamination of the floor occurred within approximately 1 m from the head of the bed and also on a monitor located more than 2 m away. When we repeated the experiment with the aerosol box, the simulated cough resulted in contamination of only the inner surface of the box and the laryngoscopist’s gloves and gowned forearms. Examination of the laryngoscopist and the room with ultraviolet light showed no macroscopic contamination outside the box.
Figure 1

Fluorescent Dye Expelled from a Simulated Patient Cough That Ended Up on the Laryngoscopist.

Our simulation method, although pragmatic, was not validated for the projectile direction, speed, or turbulence of a true cough, nor did it match the particle-size distribution. Droplets were overproduced as compared with aerosols. Our method of detection could not identify very small quantities of material that could be infectious. Nevertheless, we suggest that our ad hoc barrier enclosure provided a modicum of additional protection and could be considered to be an adjunct to standard PPE. A caveat: we found that the box restricted hand movement and would require training before use in the treatment of patients. Operators should be ready to abandon use of the box should airway management prove difficult.
  179 in total

1.  Clinical experience with emergency endotracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients in the intensive care units: a single-centered, retrospective, descriptive study.

Authors:  Hongbo Zheng; Shiyong Li; Rao Sun; Hui Yang; Xiaohui Chi; Mingbing Chen; Li Xu; Qingzhu Deng; Xinhua Li; Jie Yu; Li Wan; Ailin Luo
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 4.060

2.  Assessment of Simulated Respiratory Droplet Spread During an Ophthalmologic Slitlamp Examination.

Authors:  Tina Felfeli; Efrem D Mandelcorn
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 7.389

3.  Barrier enclosure device during patient preparation for flexible bronchoscopy.

Authors:  Inderpaul Singh Sehgal; Sahajal Dhooria; Kuruswamy Thurai Prasad; Valliappan Muthu; Ashutosh Nath Aggarwal; Ritesh Agarwal
Journal:  Lung India       Date:  2020 Sep-Oct

4.  A strategy for management of ECT patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Ethan O Bryson; Amy Starr Aloysi
Journal:  J ECT       Date:  2020-05-12       Impact factor: 3.635

Review 5.  Preserving Access: A Review of Stroke Thrombectomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  T M Leslie-Mazwi; K M Fargen; M Levitt; C P Derdeyn; S K Feske; A B Patel; J A Hirsch
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  UEG Week 2020 Poster Presentations.

Authors: 
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 4.623

7.  New York City COVID-19 resident physician exposure during exponential phase of pandemic.

Authors:  Mark P Breazzano; Junchao Shen; Aliaa H Abdelhakim; Lora R Dagi Glass; Jason D Horowitz; Sharon X Xie; C Gustavo de Moraes; Alice Chen-Plotkin; Royce Ws Chen
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 14.808

8.  A comparison of droplet and contact contamination using 3 simulated barrier techniques for COVID-19 intubation: a quality assurance study.

Authors:  Peter Rose; John Veall; Navraj Chima; Elena Vowels; Shruti Chitnis; Alana Flexman; Raymond Tang
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2020-08-31

9.  Comparison of Mc Grath-MAC and C-MAC video laryngoscopes for intubation in a COVID simulated mannequin by novice users wearing face protective gear: A randomized crossover trial.

Authors:  Saurabh Vig; Swati Bhan; Nishkarsh Gupta; Jitendra Kumar Meena; Sushma Bhatnagar
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2021-04-01

10.  Factors Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Physician Trainees in New York City during the First COVID-19 Wave.

Authors:  Kate R Pawloski; Betty Kolod; Rabeea F Khan; Vishal Midya; Tania Chen; Adeyemi Oduwole; Bernard Camins; Elena Colicino; I Michael Leitman; Ismail Nabeel; Kristin Oliver; Damaskini Valvi
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.