Background Recently, the demand for mechanical ventilation (MV) has increased with the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the conventional approaches to MV training are resource intensive and require on-site training. Consequently, the need for independent learning platforms with remote assistance in institutions without resources has surged. Objective This study aimed to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of an augmented reality (AR)–based self-learning platform for novices to set up a ventilator without on-site assistance. Methods This prospective randomized controlled pilot study was conducted at Samsung Medical Center, Korea, from January to February 2022. Nurses with no prior experience of MV or AR were enrolled. We randomized the participants into 2 groups: manual and AR groups. Participants in the manual group used a printed manual and made a phone call for assistance, whereas participants in the AR group were guided by AR-based instructions and requested assistance with the head-mounted display. We compared the overall score of the procedure, required level of assistance, and user experience between the groups. Results In total, 30 participants completed the entire procedure with or without remote assistance. Fewer participants requested assistance in the AR group compared to the manual group (7/15, 47.7% vs 14/15, 93.3%; P=.02). The number of steps that required assistance was also lower in the AR group compared to the manual group (n=13 vs n=33; P=.004). The AR group had a higher rating in predeveloped questions for confidence (median 3, IQR 2.50-4.00 vs median 2, IQR 2.00-3.00; P=.01), suitability of method (median 4, IQR 4.00-5.00 vs median 3, IQR 3.00-3.50; P=.01), and whether they intended to recommend AR systems to others (median 4, IQR 3.00-5.00 vs median 3, IQR 2.00-3.00; P=.002). Conclusions AR-based instructions to set up a mechanical ventilator were feasible for novices who had no prior experience with MV or AR. Additionally, participants in the AR group required less assistance compared with those in the manual group, resulting in higher confidence after training. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05446896; https://beta.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05446896
Background and objectives: It is often challenging even for skilled rescuers to provide adequate positive pressure ventilation consistently. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a newly developed real-time ventilation feedback device (RTVFD) that estimates tidal volume (TV) and ventilation interval (VI) in real time. Materials and methods: We conducted a randomised, crossover, manikin simulation study. A total of 26 medical providers were randomly assigned to the RTVFD-assisted ventilation (RAV) first group (n = 13) and the non-assisted ventilation (NV) first group (n = 13). Participants provided ventilation using adult and paediatric bag valves (BVs) for 2 min each. After a washout period, the simulation was repeated by exchanging the participants’ groups. Results: The primary outcome was optimal TV in the RAV and NV groups using adult and paediatric BVs. A secondary outcome was optimal VI in the RAV and NV groups using adult and paediatric BVs. The proportions of optimal TV values were higher for the RAVs when using both adult and paediatric BVs (adult BV: 47.29% vs. 18.46%, p < 0.001; paediatric BV: 89.51% vs. 72.66%, p < 0.001) than for the NVs. The proportions of optimal VI were significantly higher in RAVs when using both adult and paediatric BVs than that in NVs (adult BV: 95.64% vs. 50.20%, p < 0.001; paediatric BV: 95.83% vs. 57.14%, p < 0.001). Additionally, we found that with paediatric BVs, the simulation had a higher OR for both optimal TV (13.26; 95% CI, 9.96–17.65; p < 0.001) and VI (1.32; 1.08–1.62, p = 0.007), regardless of RTVFD use. Conclusion: Real-time feedback using RTVFD significantly improves the TV and VI in both adult and paediatric BVs in a manikin simulation study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.