Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Analise comparativa randomizada entre dois tipos de sistema de aspiracao traqueal em recem-nascidos (Randomized, comparative analysis between two tracheal suction systems in newborn) [Portuguese]
de Paula LCS, Ceccon MEJ
Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira [Journal of the Brazilian Medical Association] 2010 Jul-Aug;56(4):434-439
clinical trial
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: No; Blind subjects: Yes; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

OBJECTIVE: To quantify and compare variations in oxygen saturation throughout the suctioning procedure (before, during, and after) using two endotracheal suction systems: open suction system (OSS) versus closed suction system (CSS). METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled study was carried out with 39 newborn infants of gestational age >= 34 weeks using pressure-limited, time-cycled, continuous-flow mechanical ventilators. The infants were classified into two groups according to ventilatory parameters: group I was ventilated using positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) >= 5 cmH2O and mean airway pressure (MAP) >= 8 cmH2O; and group II using PEEP < 5 cmH2O and MAP < 8 cmH2O. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed when OSS and CSS were compared in both groups. There was a statistically significant improvement in post-procedure oxygen saturation in both groups. CONCLUSION: Both endotracheal suction systems can be used with no drawbacks of OSS in relation to CSS, provided the sample is similar to that of the present study.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help