Satisfaction of Health Professionals Regarding the Short Binasal Prong Used as a Non-Invasive Ventilation Interface in Neonatology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Débora de Fátima Camillo Ribeiro,1,2 Paula Karina Hembecker,2 Adriane Muller Nakato,2 Beatriz Luci Fernandes,2 Percy Nohama2,3 1Neonatal Services, Waldemar Monastier Hospital, Campo Largo, Paraná, Brazil; 2Graduate Program on Health Technology, Pontifícia Universidade Católica Do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil; 3Graduate Program on Biomedical Engineering, Universidade Tecnológica Federal Do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, BrazilCorrespondence: Percy Nohama, Graduate Program on Health Technology, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Rua Imaculada Conceição 1155, Curitiba, Paraná, CEP 80215-901, Brazil, Tel +55 41 3271-1357, Email percy.nohama@pucpr.brPurpose: To evaluate the health professionals’ satisfaction regarding the short binasal prong used in Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICU), evaluate the difficulties related to its use, and present possible improvements in the design of this device.Patients and Methods: Observational, cross-sectional study with prospective data collection carried out in the NICU of a public hospital in southern Brazil. This research was presented into two stages. In the first stage, the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology was applied with 90 health professionals to evaluate the satisfaction regarding the short binasal prong. In the second stage, the health professional’s experiences and difficulties in using the binasal prongs in 14 newborns (NBs) that required non-invasive ventilation was collected. The short binasal prongs used was the Fanem® brand and the CPAP circuit was Gabisa Medical International (GMI®). Finally, improvements and recommendations were presented to optimize the device’s design.Results: The mean score of the health professionals’ satisfaction with short binasal prongs was 3.8 ± 0.6. Ease of adjustment (3.27) and dimensions (3.62) variables had the worst scores. The main difficulties pointed out by health professionals were: circuit disconnection (57.1%), the size of the prong did not correspond to NBs’ anatomical characteristics (35.7%), air leakage (21.4%), and difficulty in fixing and positioning the prong in the NB (14.28%). The improvements suggested were: appropriate prong sizes based on the anatomical characteristics of the NBs; adjustable distance between insertion and base catheters; manufactured with malleable material, however not easily foldable; curved and adjustable insertion catheters and functional system of tracheas’ connection.Conclusion: The dissatisfaction of health professionals with the dimensions and prongs adjustments and the difficulties faced in clinical practice indicate the need for improvements in these interfaces. The recommendations presented in this study may contribute to optimizing the design of the binasal prong in the future.Keywords: assistive technology, neonatal intensive care, non-invasive ventilation, surveys and questionnaires
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".