New Suction-Aid Bite Block Enables Continuous, Hands-Free Suction and Provides Greatly Improved Patient Comfort and Procedure Efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Recent advancements in gastroenterology have led to increasingly complex and lengthy diagnostic and therapeutic procedures involving the upper gastrointestinal tract. Frequent suctioning of the mouth is needed to remove oral secretions and prevent aspiration. The suctioning is usually done by the endoscopy assistant who also performs other functions. The suction catheter needs to be physically held in place by the assistant, causing delays in performing biopsies or procedures to control gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Methods: We developed Suction Aid bite block with several modifications to the traditional bite block. Results: Our bite block features multiple openings to allow stable positioning of various sizes of suction catheters, which remain in a fixed position in the mouth, thereby allowing continuous hands-free suction. This eliminates the need for the endoscopy assistant to hold on to the suction catheter. With continuous hands-free suction, patient monitoring and comfort are improved. The endoscopist and endoscopy assistant can focus on timely completion of the diagnostic or therapeutic procedure. This patent pending device has been successfully utilized in various upper endoscopic procedures such as EGD, EUS, ERCP, PEG placement, and small bowel enteroscopy. Conclusion: Our new Suction Aid bite block designed for use in any upper gastrointestinal endoscopy procedure and can accommodate various commonly used suction cannulae. It will improve patient comfort and help the endoscopist and endoscopy assistant in managing efficiency of the procedure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".