| Literature DB >> 34491428 |
Yusuke Matsui1, Tomonori Takazawa2, Akihito Takemae1, Yukie Murooka1, Masafumi Kanamoto3, Shigeru Saito1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: From the perspective of infection prevention during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a recommendation was made to use surgical masks after extubation in patients in the operating room. For compliance with this recommendation, anesthesiologists need to administer oxygen to the patient with an oxygen mask over the surgical mask. However, no studies have investigated whether this method allows good maintenance of oxygenation in patients. This study aimed to investigate which method of oxygen administration lends itself best to use with a surgical mask in terms of oxygenation.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Oxygen administration; Oxygen reserve index; Surgical mask
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34491428 PMCID: PMC8422829 DOI: 10.1007/s00540-021-02998-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anesth ISSN: 0913-8668 Impact factor: 2.078
Fig. 1The three different oxygen administration methods tested. Image showing wearing an oxygen mask over (a) and under (b) the surgical mask and wearing a nasal cannula under the surgical mask (c). The subject held a gas sampling tube in her mouth
Fig. 2Subject recruitment, randomization and analysis
Fig. 3Comparison of oxygen reserve index between the three oxygen administration methods. The ends of the box define the 25th and 75th percentiles, with the horizontal line in the middle showing the median, and the error bars defining the 10th and 90th percentiles. The dots indicate outliers. *Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance on ranks with the post hoc Tukey test, P < 0.001
Fig. 4Comparison of end-tidal oxygen concentration between the three oxygen administration methods. The ends of the box define the 25th and 75th percentiles, with the horizontal line in the middle showing the median, and the error bars defining the 10th and 90th percentiles. The dots indicate outliers. *Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance on ranks with the post hoc Tukey test, P < 0.001