Link to Article:
https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2024.2425372
Short Summary:
This study compared manual ventilation using the SafeBVM Sotair flow control valve (FCV) against a mechanical transport ventilator under simulated lung conditions, including healthy lungs, obstructive disease, and restrictive disease.
Key Findings:
- Manual ventilation with Sotair provided PIP and tidal volumes (Vt) comparable to a mechanical ventilator, proving its effectiveness as a safer alternative when ventilators are unavailable.
- Healthy lungs: PIP 10.6 cmH₂O (Sotair) vs. 13.6 cmH₂O (ventilator); Vt 654 mL (Sotair) vs. 1,037 mL (ventilator).
- Obstructive disease: PIP 35.5 cmH₂O (Sotair) vs. 17 cmH₂O (ventilator); Vt 710 mL (Sotair) vs. 747 mL (ventilator).
- Restrictive disease: PIP 22.2 cmH₂O (Sotair) vs. 19.6 cmH₂O (ventilator); Vt 711 mL (Sotair) vs. 801 mL (ventilator).
- The Sotair device prevented excessive inspiratory pressures
Conclusion:
The study confirmed that SafeBVM’s Sotair device provided ventilation performance that was similar to that of a mechanical ventilator.
Reference:
Salcido, DD, Forghani, R, Lane, N, Gumucio, JA, Menegazzi, JJ. A Comparison between Manual Ventilation with a Flow Control Valve versus a Mechanical Transport Ventilator. Prehospital Emergency Care, S67-S68. (2025) The Menegazzi Scientific Sessions: Research Abstracts for the 2025 National Association of EMS Physicians Annual Meeting, Prehospital Emergency Care, 29:sup1, S1-S113, S67-S68DOI: 10.1080/10903127.2024.2425372