Would anti-choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: The brand-new anti-choking devices (LifeVac® and DeCHOKER®) have been recently developed to treat Foreign Body Airway Obstruction (FBAO). However, the scientific evidence around these devices that are available to the public is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the ability to use the LifeVac® and DeCHOKER® devices in an adult FBAO simulated scenario, by untrained health science students. METHODS: Forty-three health science students were asked to solve an FBAO event in three simulated scenarios: 1) using the LifeVac®, 2) using the DeCHOKER®, and 3) following the recommendations of the current FBAO protocol. A simulation-based assessment was used to analyze the correct compliance rate in the three scenarios based on the correct execution of the required steps, and the time it took to complete each one. RESULTS: Participants achieved correct compliance rates between 80-100%, similar in both devices (p = 0.192). Overall test times were significantly shorter with LifeVac® than DeCHOKER® device (36.6 sec. [31.9-44.4] vs. 50.4 s [36.7-66.9], p < 0.001). Regarding the recommended protocol, a 50% correct compliance rate was obtained in those with prior training vs. 31.3% without training, (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Untrained health science students are able to quickly and adequately use the brand-new anti-choking devices but have more difficulties in applying the current recommended FBAO protocol.

Knowledge and skills of pediatric residents in managing pediatric foreign body airway obstruction using novel airway clearance devices in Spain: A randomized simulation trial.

Aim: Recent emergence of airway clearance devices (ACDs) as a treatment alternative for foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO) lacks substantial evidence on efficacy and safety. This study aimed to assess pediatric residents' knowledge and skills in managing a simulated pediatric choking scenario, adhering to recommended protocols, and using LifeVac© and DeCHOKER© ACDs. Methods: Randomized controlled simulation trial, in which 60 pediatric residents from 3 different hospitals (median age 27 [25.0-29.9]; 76.7% female) were asked to solve an unannounced pediatric simulated choking scenario using three interventions to manage (randomized order): 1) following the recommended protocol of the European Resuscitation Council (encouraging to cough or combination of back blows and abdominal thrusts); 2) using LifeVac©; and 3) using DeCHOKER©. A Little Anne QCPR™ manikin (Laerdal Medical) was used. The variable compliance rate (%) was calculated according to the correct/incorrect execution of the steps constituting the proper actions for each test. Results: Participants demonstrated a correct compliance rate only ranging between 50-75% in following the recommended protocol for managing partial FBAO progressing to severe. Despite unfamiliarity with the ACDs, pediatric residents achieved rates between 75% and 100%, with no significant difference noted between the two devices (p = 0.173). Both scenarios were successfully resolved in under a minute, with LifeVac© demonstrating a significantly shorter response time compared to DeCHOKER© (39.2 [30.4-49.1] vs. 45.1s [33.7-59.2], p = 0.010). Conclusions: Only a minority of pediatric residents were able to adhere to the recommended FBAO protocol, whereas 70% of them were able to adequately use the ACDs. However, since a significant proportion could not, it seems that ACDs themselves do not address all issues.

A Protocol for the Prospective Evaluation of Novel Suction-Based Airway Clearance Devices in the Treatment of Foreign Body Airway Obstructions.

Background Foreign body airway obstructions (FBAOs, choking) are a significant cause of preventable mortality. Abdominal thrusts, back blows, and chest compressions are traditional interventions. However, suction-based airway clearance devices (ACDs) have recently been marketed as an alternative. Of note, there is limited published evidence regarding their efficacy and safety. Our research has two aims: (1) to investigate what situational and patient factors are frequently identified, and which are associated with relief of the FBAO and survival in individuals with FBAOs treated with an ACD; and (2) to describe the experience of individuals who have used ACDs in response to a FBAO and identify facilitators and barriers to the use of ACDs compared to traditional interventions. Methods and analysis A prospective database will be developed using an online reporting system to capture ACD uses, independent of manufacturers, from July 1st, 2021 to December 31st, 2023. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize cases, outcomes, and adverse events. Clinically important subgroups will be stratified for analysis, including the severity of obstruction, patient demographics, and training of ACD users. Semi-structured interviews will also be conducted with a subset of ACD users to describe in detail their experience using the device. Themes from these interviews will be assessed using the theoretical domains framework. Discussion This study will improve the evidence surrounding ACDs and compare it to current data for traditional techniques, with the aim of optimizing FBAO treatment. Data on ACDs are urgently needed as these devices are already being used by parents, caregivers, lay rescuers, and healthcare professionals to respond to choking emergencies. This evaluation will provide important information about their effectiveness and any safety concerns which can inform the public, resuscitation guidelines, and future research studies.