An evaluation of bag-valve-mask ventilation using an ergonomically designed facemask among novice users: A simulation-based pilot study

The Performances of Standard and ResMed Masks During Bag–Valve–Mask Ventilation

“…However, this technique has several drawbacks, including technical difficulties and mask leaks. [2][3][4] A tight seal between the face and a mask is an essential component of successful BVM ventilation. There are several factors related to mask sealing, such as patient age and gender, facial anatomy, the rescuer's hand size, and the mask-holding technique used.…”

“…There are several factors related to mask sealing, such as patient age and gender, facial anatomy, the rescuer's hand size, and the mask-holding technique used. [4][5][6][7][8][9] Several studies have indicated that a tight mask seal is frequently difficult to obtain and maintain during single-rescuer BVM ventilation. 4,10,11 Various mask-sealing techniques and mask designs have been developed to improve BVM ventilation, 4,[12][13][14] but as yet, the optimal method has not been determined.…”

An Evaluation of the Effects of Human Factors and Ergonomics on Health Care and Patient Safety Practices: A Systematic Review

“…Most of the studies were from developed countries; eleven studies were conducted in the USA [25–35], two were conducted in Canada [36–37], ten studies were conducted in Europe [38–47], two studies were conducted in Hong Kong [48–49] and three studies were conducted in Israel, Brazil and Iran [50–52]. Twenty studies were controlled studies [25–27,29,32,34,36–44,46,48,49,51,52], two of which were RCTs [44, 51]. The other eight studies were before/after surveys, without a control group [28, 30, 31, 33, 35, 45, 47, 50].…”

“…The other eight studies were before/after surveys, without a control group [28, 30, 31, 33, 35, 45, 47, 50]. The target populations were staff working in hospitals and nursing homes, including nurses [35, 37–39, 41–43, 45, 47–49, 51], surgeons (3 studies) [27, 44, 46], medical students (4 studies) [25,32,36,52] and other health care workers (8 studies) [26, 28–30, 33–34, 40, 50]. Seventeen studies reported their funding resources [26, 28–31, 33–37, 43, 45–49, 52] and eleven were supported by public funding [26–28, 32–35,41,43–44,46].…”

“…Thirteen studies of physical ergonomic interventions [25–29, 36–37, 40, 43–44, 46, 50, 52] primarily focused on the change of working posture, the physical design of medical equipment (dentistry chairs, laparoscopic grasping tools, patient-controlled analgesia, and bag-valve mask) and workplaces. Four studies performed cognitive ergonomic interventions [30, 38–39, 51] (e.g., HFE education or training).…”