1004 Three Different Mask Holds for Positive Pressure Ventilation in a Neonatal Mannequin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aim Mask ventilation is commonly used for neonatal resuscitation. Variable leak and inconsistent tidal volumes are reported in mannequin and delivery room studies. We compared the spider hold (SH) against the two-point top hold (TPTH), and two-handed hold (THH) for delivering positive pressure ventilation (PPV). Methods 53 participants from 5 professional groups provided PPV with each hold for 1 minute to a mannequin, using a T-piece resuscitator (PIP/PEEP 30/5 cmH2O, 40–60 inflations/min). Mask leak and expired tidal volume (TVE) were measured with a flow sensor. ANOVA was used to compare the average median leak from each participant for each hold and by professional group. Results 7324 inflations were analysed. The mean (SD) leak was 35(27)%, 38(34)% and 39(33)% for the TPTH, SH and THH respectively (p=0.003). The mean (SD) TVE was not significantly different between the three holds (p=0.09). The lowest mean (SD) leak was measured with the THH by registrars 13(14)% and highest by midwives with the THH 48(36)% (p=0.001). Conclusion Each hold can be used to give PPV. The SH does not appear to reduce leak when compared to the other holds.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".