Where's the Tube? Evaluation of Hand-held Ultrasound in Confirming Endotracheal Tube Placement
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis of endotracheal tube (ETT) mal-position may be delayed in extreme environments. Several methods are utilized to confirm proper ETT placement, but these methods can be unreliable or unavailable in certain settings. Thoracic sonography, previously utilized to detect pneumothoraces, has not been tested to assess ETT placement. HYPOTHESIS: Thoracic sonography could correlate with pulmonary ventilation, and thereby, help to confirm proper ETT placement. METHODS: Thirteen patients requiring elective intubation under general anesthesia, and data from two trauma patients were evaluated. Using a portable, hand-held, ultrasound (PHHU) machine, sonographic recordings of the chest wall visceral-parietal pleural interface (VPPI) were recorded bilaterally in each patient during all phases of airway management: (1) pre-oxygenation; (2) induction; (3) paralysis; (4) intubation; and (5) ventilation. RESULTS: The VPPI could be well-imaged for all of the patients. In the two trauma patients, right mainstem intubations were noted in which specific pleural signals were not seen in the left chest wall VPPI after tube placement. These signs returned after correct repositioning of the ETT tube. In all of the elective surgery patients, signs correlating with bilateral ventilation in each patient were imaged and correlated with confirmation of ETT placement by anesthesiology. CONCLUSIONS: This report raises the possibility that thoracic sonography may be another tool that could be used to confirm proper ETT placement. This technique may have merit in extreme environments, such as in remote, pre-hospital settings or during aerospace medical transports, in which auscultation is impossible due to noise, or capnography is not available, and thus, requires further scientific evaluation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it