Compression force on the upper jaw during neonatal intubation: Mannequin study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Neonatal intubation is a technically challenging procedure, and pressure-related injuries to surrounding structures have been reported. The primary objective of this study was to determine the pressure exerted on the upper jaw during tracheal intubation using a neonatal mannequin. METHOD: Multidisciplinary care providers working at a neonatal intensive care unit were requested to intubate a neonatal mannequin using the standard laryngoscope and 3.0-mm (internal diameter) endotracheal tube. Compression force exerted was measured by using pressure-sensitive film taped on the upper jaw before every intubation attempt. Pressure, area under pressure and time taken to intubate were compared between the different types of health-care professionals. RESULTS: Thirty care providers intubated the mannequin three times each. Pressure impressions were observed on the developer film after every intubation attempt (n = 90). The mean pressure exerted during intubation across all health-care providers was 568 kPa (SD 78). The mean area placed under pressure was 142 mm(2) (SD 45), and the mean time taken for intubation was 14.7 s (SD 4.3). There was no difference in pressure exerted on the upper jaw between frequent and less frequent intubators. It was found that pressure greater than 400 kPa was inadvertently applied on the upper jaw during neonatal intubation, far exceeding the 250 kPa shown to cause tissue injury in animal models. CONCLUSION: The upper jaw is exposed to a significant compression force during intubation. Although such exposure is brief, it has the potential to cause tissue injury. Contact of the laryngoscope blade with the upper jaw occurred in all intubation attempts with the currently used design of laryngoscope.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".