No abstract

BackgroundForeign body airway obstructions (FBAOs, choking) are a significant cause of preventable mortality. Abdominal thrusts, back blows, and chest compressions are traditional interventions. However, suctionbased 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 analysisA 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. Semistructured 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. DiscussionThis 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.

Background: Choking is a prevalent source of injury and mortality worldwide. Traditional choking interventions, including abdominal thrusts and back blows, have remained the standard of care for decades despite limited published data. Suction-based airway clearance devices (ACDs) are becoming increasingly popular and there is an urgent need to evaluate their role in choking intervention. The aim of this study was to describe the effectiveness (i.e., resolution of choking symptoms) and safety (i.e., adverse events) of identified airway clearance devices interventions to date. Methods: This retrospective descriptive analysis included any individual who self-identified to manufacturers as having used an ACD as a choking intervention prior to 1 July 2021. Records were included if they contained three clinical variables (patient’s age, type of foreign body, and resolution of choking symptoms). Researchers performed data extraction using a standardized form which included patient, situational, and outcome variables. Results: The analysis included 124 non-invasive (LifeVac©) and 61 minimally invasive (Dechoker©) ACD interventions. Median patient age was 40 (LifeVac©, 2–80) and 73 (Dechoker©, 5–84) with extremes of age being most common [<5 years: LifeVac© 37.1%, Dechoker© 23.0%; 80+ years: 27.4%, 37.7%]. Food was the most frequent foreign body (LifeVac© 84.7%, Dechoker© 91.8%). Abdominal thrusts (LifeVac© 37.9%, Dechoker© 31.1%) and back blows (LifeVac© 39.5%, Dechoker© 41.0%) were often co-interventions. Resolution of choking symptoms occurred following use of the ACD in 123 (LifeVac©) and 60 (Dechoker©) cases. Three adverse events (1.6%) were reported: disconnection of bellows/mask during intervention (LifeVac©), a lip laceration (Dechoker©), and an avulsed tooth (Dechoker©). Conclusion: Initial available data has shown ACDs to be promising in the treatment of choking. However, limitations in data collection methods and quality exist. The second phase of this evaluation will be an industry independent, prospective assessment in order to improve data quality, and inform future choking intervention algorithms.

No abstract

Background: Foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO, choking) are a significant cause of preventable mortality. Abdominal thrusts, back blows, and chest compressions are traditional interventions; however, suction-based airway clearance devices (anti-choking 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 a FBAO 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: All ACD case reports collected a priori by manufacturers will be analyzed up to July 1st, 2021. Following, a prospective database will be developed using an online reporting system to capture future ACD use from July 1st, 2021 to Dec 31st, 2023. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize cases, 58 outcomes, and adverse events. Where possible, bivariable and multivariable analysis will be employed to assess for predictors of outcomes (relief of FBAO, survival, and survival with good neurological function). Semi-structured interviews will 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. Ethics and dissemination: This study has ethics approval from the University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee (HC210242). Findings from this multi-year, multi-method study will be published in peer reviewed literature, presented at conferences and contribute to informing future resuscitation guidelines. Data on ACDs are urgently needed as these devices are already being used by parents, caregivers, lay rescuers, and healthcare professionals