Positive-pressure ventilation during transport: a randomized crossover study of self-inflating and flow-inflating resuscitators in a simulation model.

Background: Positive-pressure ventilation during transport of intubated patients is generally delivered via a hand-pressurized device. Of these devices, self-inflating resuscitators (SIR) and flow-inflating resuscitators (FIR) constitute the two major types used. Selection of a particular device for transport, however, remains largely an institutional practice.

Objective: To evaluate the hypothesis that transport ventilation goals of intubated pediatric patients are better achieved using an FIR compared to an SIR.

Methods: This randomized crossover simulation study compared the performance of SIR and FIR among anesthesia providers in a pediatric transport scenario. Subjects hand-ventilated a test lung while simultaneously maneuvering a stretcher bed to simulate patient transport. Hand ventilation was carried out using a Jackson-Rees circuit (FIR) and a Laerdal pediatric silicone resuscitator (SIR). The primary outcome was the proportion of total breaths delivered within the predefined target PIP/PEEP range (30+/- 3, 10+/- 3 cm H2O). Secondary outcomes included proportion of total breaths delivered with operationally defined unacceptable breath variables (PIP > 35 cm H2O or PEEP < 5 cm H2O).

Results: Overall, participants were four times more likely to deliver target breaths and one-third less likely to deliver unacceptable breaths using the FIR compared to the SIR. When comparing device performance, a 44% increase in the proportions of target breaths and a 40.4% decrease in unacceptable breaths using the FIR were observed (P < 0.0001 for both).

Conclusions: Hand ventilation during patient transport is superior using the FIR compared to the SIR to achieve target ventilatory goals and avoid unacceptable ventilatory cycles.