ArticlePDF Available

Suction-based airway clearance devices for foreign body airway obstruction: protocol for a systematic review

Authors:

Abstract

Background and aim: This paper outlines a protocol for a scoping review that will critically appraise the existing evidence base on the efficacy of airway clearance devices for foreign body airway obstruction. Methods: The search was conducted in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases. The quality, validity, and relevance of each study will be systematically evaluated using formal risk of bias/quality assessment tools, such as The Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction Tool. Results: The systematic review will identify and appraise all available studies on the efficacy of suction-based airway clearance devices for foreign body airway obstruction. The review will summarize the findings of the included studies and provide an overall assessment of the evidence on the devices' efficacy. Conclusions: The systematic review will inform best practices in airway management by providing a comprehensive evaluation of the current literature on the effectiveness of new devices for foreign body airway obstruction treatments. (www.actabiomedica.it)
Acta Biomed 2024; Vol. 95, N. 3: e2024110 DOI: 10.23750/abm.v95i3.15669 © Mattioli 1885
Health professions
Suction-based airway clearance devices for foreign body
airway obstruction: protocol for a systematic review
Natalino Palermo1, Miguel Angel Paludi2, Francesco Limonti3, Angelica Semeraro4,
Daniele Ermanno5, Sandro Ganzino6, Nicola Ramacciati7
1Department of district Valle Crati, health company, Cosenza, Italy; 2Department of Covid health company Cosenza, Italy;
3Department of operating room health company, Cosenza, Italy; 4Department of united neurology local health company, Bari,
Italy; 5Department of ophthalmology operational united, health company, Crotone, Italy; 6Department of emergency health
company, Cosenza, Italy; 7Department of Pharmacy, Health and Nutritional Sciences (DFSSN) of the University of Calabria
Abstract. Background and aim: is paper outlines a protocol for a scoping review that will critically appraise
the existing evidence base on the efficacy of airway clearance devices for foreign body airway obstruction.
Methods: e search was conducted in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus data-
bases. e quality, validity, and relevance of each study will be systematically evaluated using formal risk of
bias/quality assessment tools, such as e Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction Tool. Results: e systematic
review will identify and appraise all available studies on the efficacy of suction-based airway clearance devices
for foreign body airway obstruction. e review will summarize the findings of the included studies and
provide an overall assessment of the evidence on the devices’ efficacy. Conclusions: e systematic review will
inform best practices in airway management by providing a comprehensive evaluation of the current literature
on the effectiveness of new devices for foreign body airway obstruction treatments. (www.actabiomedica.it)
Key words: foreign body airway obstruction, anti-choking, airway clearance devices, resuscitation, basic life
support, systematic review protocol
Introduction
Airway obstruction refers to a condition where
normal breathing is impeded due to various factors,
both direct and indirect, disrupting the efficient ex-
change of gases with the surrounding environment.
Prolonged obstruction leads to hypoxemia and hy-
poxia, resulting in oxygen deficiency in the blood and
tissues, adversely affecting delicate organs such as the
brain (1). Continual hypoxic conditions cause tissue
dysfunction, leading to a sequence of events: loss of
consciousness, irreversible brain damage, coma, and
ultimately patient fatality. Even survival post-incident
may result in severe cerebral hypoxia, leading to ir-
reversible motor and/or sensory impairments due to
nervous tissue necrosis. Despite being preventable,
foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO) pose a sig-
nificant global threat, contributing to injuries and fa-
talities. Annually, the United States reports over 5000
choking-related deaths, while England and Wales
record approximately 400 fatalities attributed to this
cause (2). In Japan, it stands as the leading cause of
accidental death (3). Food ingestion accounts for the
majority of airway obstructions, and mortality rates
correlate with age (4). However, retrospective data on
foreign body airway obstructions may underestimate
their incidence. Notably, in one study, individuals aged
over 74 years accounted for 56% of cases (5). e causes
of choking involve three main factors: intrinsic or ex-
trinsic airway obstructions, inadequate environmental
oxygen concentration, and presence of chemicals dis-
rupting normal respiration (6). Airway obstructions
Acta Biomed 2024; Vol. 95, N. 3: e2024110
2
can be partial or complete. Partial obstructions permit
minimal air passage, allowing some ventilation and in-
creasing the likelihood of expelling the foreign body
through coughing. us, encouraging a conscious indi-
vidual to cough aids in expelling the foreign body due
to the higher pressures generated (6). Conversely, com-
plete obstructions hinder air passage due to the foreign
body, resulting in hypoxia, loss of consciousness, and
cardiac arrest within minutes. Prompt treatment in-
volves traditional techniques like the Heimlich maneu-
ver, including back blows and abdominal thrusts (7).
However, these techniques may fail in specific cases,
complicating rescue efforts, especially with immobi-
lized patients in wheelchairs, pregnant individuals, or
those who are pathologically obese, highlighting the
need to determine the most appropriate and effective
technique (8). e most established airway clearance
methods date back to 1975 when Dr. Heimlich intro-
duced sub-diaphragmatic pressure as a means to ex-
pel obstructive objects. Prior to this, tracheotomy and,
where feasible, bronchoscopy were commonly us (4).
Recent years have seen the exploration and testing
of alternative solutions in some regions, focusing on
new airway clearance devices (ACDs) using port-
able aspiration and negative pressure within the air-
ways (7). ese devices come in non-invasive e.g.,
LifeVac© (LifeVac LLC, Nesconset, New York, NY,
USA) and minimally invasive types e.g., DeChoker©
(LLC, Wheat Ridge, CO, USA). e LifeVac is a
non-invasive device resembling a plunger with a valve
adhering to the patient’s mouth, generating unidirec-
tional suction to remove foreign bodies. Conversely,
the DeChoker utilizes an oropharyngeal tube and a
plunger-like mechanism to lower the tongue and cre-
ate oropharyngeal communication. Equipped with a
face mask, it employs negative pressure to expel for-
eign bodies (9). However, their effectiveness remains
unproven, and the International Liaison Committee
on Resuscitation (ILCOR) has refrained from specific
recommendations due to the lack of evidence regard-
ing safety, effectiveness, and user training for these de-
vices. Currently, no study has directly compared these
devices with standard airway clearance maneuvers (9).
Nevertheless, in practice, DeChoker and LifeVac de-
vices have proven reliable in resolving foreign body
obstructions when traditional techniques failed,
particularly in training scenarios, care facilities, and
non-medical environments (10). While ACD device
introduction holds promise in improving FBAO man-
agement, comprehensive clinical research is impera-
tive to confirm their efficacy and safety. is protocol
outlines the plan for an update of previous systematic
reviews (8, 10).
Methods and analysis
Study design
is systematic review protocol presents the meth-
ods and procedures used to critically appraise the exist-
ing evidence base on the efficacy of negative-pressure,
anti-choking devices in alleviating severe foreign body
airway obstructions (FBAOs). e review assessed the
strength of this evidence and identified any further re-
search areas that warrant investigation before recom-
mending widespread incorporation of these devices
into resuscitation guidelines. e overarching goal of
this review is to establish optimal standards in airway
management practices. e PRISMA-P guidelines
were followed for the protocol (11), while the PRISMA
guidelines will be used for the review article (12).
Search methods
To ensure a comprehensive review, meticulously
formulated search strings were crafted and deployed
across various databases. ese encompassed exhaus-
tive exploration in esteemed databases like MEDLINE
(via the PubMed interface), CINAHL (accessible
through the Embase interface), the Cochrane Library,
and Scopus. Furthermore, the search was delimited to
publications released within the last five years - from
January 1, 2019 - to encapsulate the most recent and
relevant research findings in such field. e research
will be conducted specifically from January 27th to
January 2024 31st. We will use the PICO framework,
which will allow us to select the studies to consider.
Based on the relevance of our research question, this
framework allows us to demarcate the study area (see
Table 1.). In Box 1, the search string formulated for
the MEDLINE database is displayed.
Acta Biomed 2024; Vol. 95, N. 3: e2024110 3
Quality appraisal
e comprehensive assessment will employ vali-
dated risk of bias and quality assessment tools, notably
the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT), facilitat-
ing a meticulous examination of the studies (13). ese
assessments will be independently conducted by two
researchers. Any disparities in their evaluations will
undergo rigorous discussions aiming for consensus.
If discrepancies persist without resolution, a third im-
partial reviewer will be engaged to provide an objective
assessment, thereby ensuring a conclusive resolution.
e CCAT serves as a versatile instrument capable of
assessing the methodological quality across a diverse ar-
ray of research designs, including quasi-experimental,
descriptive-exploratory-observational, qualitative, sys-
tematic review, and true experimental designs. With 22
items categorized into 8 distinct sections - Preliminaries,
Introduction, Design, Sampling, Data Collection, Ethi-
cal Matters, Results, and Discussion - the CCAT pro-
vides a comprehensive framework for evaluation (14).
Data extraction and analysis
e study will adhere to the Preferred Report-
ing Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Protocols (PRISMA) guideline (12). Data extrac-
tion and analysis will be conducted in a two-phase
process. Initially, two authors will independently
scrutinize the titles and abstracts of retrieved litera-
ture to identify potential articles for inclusion in the
systematic review. Discrepancies in assessments will
be resolved through discussion between the authors,
with involvement from a third party in the event of
unresolved matters. Subsequently, the same two au-
thors will independently acquire full texts for selected
articles and perform data abstraction using standard-
ized forms. Any inconsistencies in the abstracted data
will be addressed through discussion between the au-
thors, with involvement from a third party if necessary.
To ensure high standards of quality and reliability in
the systematic review, we will implement a rigorous
evaluation process. is process will thoroughly assess
Table 1. Research Question Breakdown according to the PICO Model.
P (Problem) I (Intervention) C (Comparison) O (Outcome)
Foreign body airway
obstruction
FBAO
Adult choking emergencies
Choking incidences
Choking victim
Life-threatening choking
situation
Foreign body asphyxia
Aspiration
Negative pressure devices
for airway obstruction
LifeVac
Dechoker
Suction-based airway
clearance devices
Anti-Choking Device
ACD
Heimlich maneuver
Traditional airway clearance
methods
Abdominal thrusts
Conventional methods
Successful removal
Time to removal
Management of choking
Safety
Efficacy
Ease of application
Easy to use
Usability
Complications
Adverse events
Effective
Effectivenes
Appropriate
Pratical
Effective resuscitation
Benefits
Harms
Potential associated risks
Delayed resuscitation
First line treatment
Aspirate stomach content
Aspiration pneumonia post
intervention
Chest infection
Trauma
Acta Biomed 2024; Vol. 95, N. 3: e2024110
4
data - as well as animal studies, experimental, or lab-
oratory models - are outside the scope of this review.
Additionally, studies exclusively focusing on infant pop-
ulations below one-year-old (the unique anatomy and
physiology of neonates and infants make them a dis-
tinct population with specific requirements) and those
confined solely to animal research will be excluded from
consideration. ese criteria were carefully crafted to
ensure the review’s scope encompasses a comprehensive
range of relevant studies while delineating boundaries to
maintain precision and relevance in the analysis.
Data abstraction
e review adopts a systematic approach to ex-
tract relevant data, encompassing study design, par-
ticipant demographics, and outcome measures from
each included study. ese studies are then categorized
based on their respective levels of evidence, facilitating
a comparative assessment of the strength and reliabil-
ity of their findings.
Synthesis
e key findings from each study were meticu-
lously presented in a synoptic tabular format to allow for
a coherent and structured comparison. Subsequently,
these findings were critically analyzed and discussed
within the context of their respective evidence levels,
fostering a comprehensive and informed synthesis of
the cumulative evidence. No predetermined plans have
been outlined for conducting subgroup analysis as part
of this review. e focus remains on a comprehensive
analysis encompassing diverse studies within the es-
tablished scope and criteria. e findings of the studies
were summarized in a narrative format, and the focus
was on identifying patterns and themes in the data. e
qualitative summary was also used to identify areas for
further research. To assess the strength of evidence in
the reviewed articles, it was employed the hierarchy of
evidence proposed by Polit and Beck (15).
Conclusion
Our systematic review examined different air-
way obstruction devices to assess their effectiveness in
the methodological robustness and relevance of each
included study.
Inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria
e inclusion criteria for this systematic review en-
compass a broad range of pertinent studies while main-
taining a clear focus on relevant content. Studies of any
design published in peer-reviewed journals are eligible
for consideration. e content of these studies is not
restricted, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of vari-
ous study types. Participants included in these studies
should consist of humans aged over one year, along with
mannequins or cadavers experiencing foreign body air-
way obstructions. e interventions encompass a spec-
trum of prevailing airway obstruction devices, such as
negative-pressure devices, suction-based airway clear-
ance devices, and Anti-Choking Devices. Addition-
ally, the review will consider various scenarios serving
as comparators or controls, including no action, the
Heimlich maneuver, traditional airway clearance meth-
ods, and abdominal thrusts. is review aims to incor-
porate studies conducted across diverse clinical settings,
embracing hospitals and community healthcare facili-
ties worldwide. In contrast, exclusion criteria delineate
parameters to maintain the focus and integrity of the
review. Unpublished studies, including conference ab-
stracts and trial protocols, will be excluded. Similarly,
editorial pieces and opinion articles lacking primary
Box 1. The search string formulated for MEDLINE
database.
(successful removal OR time to removal OR management
of choking OR safety OR efficacy OR ease of application
OR easy to use OR usability OR complications OR adverse
events OR effective OR effectivenes OR appropriate OR
pratical OR effective resuscitation OR benefits OR harms
OR potential associated risks OR delayed resuscitation OR
first line treatment OR aspirate stomach content OR aspi-
ration pneumonia OR post intervention OR chest infec-
tion OR trauma) AND (((((((Foreign body asphyxia) OR
(life threatening choking situation)) OR (choking victim))
OR (choking incidences)) OR (choking emergencies))
OR (‘Foreign body airway obstruction’ OR (FBAO)))
AND (((((Negative pressure devices for airway obstruc-
tion) OR (LifeVac)) OR (Dechoker)) OR (suction based
airway clearance)) OR (Anti Choking Device))) Filters:
from 2019 - 2023
Acta Biomed 2024; Vol. 95, N. 3: e2024110 5
standard techniques due to safety, effectiveness, and
training concerns.
What will be the main findings?
e findings of our systematic review aim to of-
fer evidence supporting the potential effectiveness of
ACDs in clearing foreign body airway obstructions
(FBAOs), especially when traditional methods like the
Heimlich maneuver prove unsuccessful.
Where and on whom will the research have an impact?
Improved techniques or devices for clearing air-
way obstructions could significantly impact patient
care, especially in scenarios where traditional methods
might fail. If proven effective and safe through robust
research, these devices could potentially save lives and
reduce complications associated with FBAO, particu-
larly among vulnerable populations like the elderly or
those with physical limitations.
Study registration
is systematic review was registered with PROS-
PERO on 11 November 2023 (CRD42023477631).
Conflict of Interest: Each author declares that he or she has no
commercial associations (e.g. consultancies, stock ownership,
equity interest, patent/licensing arrangement etc.) that might pose
a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.
Authors Contribution: NP contributed to the conception; MAP,
FL, AS contributed equally to the conception, design, draft of
the paper; DE and SG contributed equally to the conception, re-
view and editing of the paper; NR contributed to the conception,
supervision and methodology of the paper.
References
1. Olasveengen TM, Semeraro F, Ristagno G, et al. European
Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Basic Life
Support. Resuscitation 2021;161:98-114. doi:10.1016
/j.resuscitation.2021.02.009.
2. GBD 2021 Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Collaborators.
Global, regional, and national mortality due to uninten-
tional carbon monoxide poisoning, 2000-2021: results
from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet
managing foreign body airway obstruction (FBAO)
and choking emergencies. It maintains a stringent
focus on diverse scenarios involving human subjects
above infancy and simulated situations featuring man-
nequins or cadavers, excluding research centered on
infants and animal studies. e extensive evaluation
of airway obstruction devices, including negative pres-
sure and suction-based devices, and the Anti-Choking
Device, signifies a comprehensive approach. is thor-
ough analysis not only aims to gauge their effective-
ness but also their adaptability across varied clinical
settings, spanning hospitals to community healthcare
facilities worldwide. Such a comprehensive evaluation
within diverse healthcare environments underscores
the review’s robustness and real-world relevance. e
review’s key outcomes encompass successful airway
obstruction removal, time efficiency, and comprehen-
sive choking emergency management, serving as criti-
cal benchmarks. Categorizing neurological outcomes
based on validated criteria provides invaluable insights
into the interventions’ impact on neurological well-
being. Beyond primary outcomes, the review encom-
passes usability metrics and potential adverse events
associated with interventions, offering a comprehen-
sive understanding of practical implications. Evalua-
tion criteria include learning curves, user errors, task
efficiency, and user satisfaction. Additionally, scruti-
nizing adverse events like aspiration pneumonia, chest
infections, and trauma amplifies the depth of assess-
ment, potentially influencing future guidelines. e
holistic analysis of these diverse aspects enhances the
review’s significance in shaping comprehensive recom-
mendations for addressing FBAO and choking emer-
gencies in healthcare protocols.
Impact
What problem will the study address?
Foreign body airway obstructions pose grave risks,
potentially resulting in fatalities and injuries, where
traditional methods like the Heimlich maneuver may
falter in specific cases. New Airway Clearance Devices
offer less invasive approaches to clear airways, yet their
effectiveness lacks robust clinical validation, leading to
insufficient data for ILCOR to recommend them over
Acta Biomed 2024; Vol. 95, N. 3: e2024110
6
10. Dunne CL, Peden AE, Queiroga AC, Gomez Gonzalez C,
Valesco B, Szpilman D. A systematic review on the
effectiveness of anti-choking suction devices and identifi-
cation of research gaps. Resuscitation 2020;153:219-226.
doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.02.021.
11. Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, et al. Preferred report-
ing items for systematic review and meta-analysis proto-
cols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ
2015;350:g7647. doi:10.1136/bmj.g7647.
12. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. e PRISMA
2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting system-
atic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71.
13. Crowe M, Sheppard L, Campbell A. Reliability analysis
for a proposed critical appraisal tool demonstrated value
for diverse research designs. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65(4):
375-383. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.08.006.
14. Crowe M, Sheppard L. A general critical appraisal
tool: an evaluation of construct validity. Int J Nurs Stud
2011;48(12):1505-1516. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.06.004.
15. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing Research: Generating and As-
sessing Evidence for Nursing Practice, 8th ed. Philadelphia:
Wolters Kluwer Health/Lipincott, Williams, & Wilkens,
PA, 2012.
Correspondence:
Received: 25 January 2024
Accepted: 7 May 2024
Natalino Palermo, Dr
Department of district Valle Crati
Via Ippocrate c/o Ospedale Acri, Acri, Italy
E-mail: natalino.palermo@aspcs.it
Public Health 2023;8(11):e839-e849. doi:10.1016/S2468
-2667(23)00185-8.
3. Norii T, Igarashi Y, Sung-Ho K, et al. Protocol for a
nationwide prospective, observational cohort study of
foreign-body airway obstruction in Japan: the MOCHI reg-
istry. BMJ Open 2020;10(7):e039689. doi:10.1136/bmjopen
-2020-039689.
4. Gutierrez A, Strickland M. Gastric Perforation After Ab-
dominal rusts for Choking: a Case of Heimlich Harm.
J Gastrointest Surg 2020;24(7):1704-1706. doi:10.1007
/s11605-019-04451-2.
5. Perkins GD, Handley AJ, Koster RW, et al. European
Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015:
Section 2. Adult basic life support and automated external
defibrillation. Resuscitation 2015;95:81-99. doi:10.1016
/j.resuscitation.2015.07.015.
6. Fridman L, Fraser-omas J, Pike I, Macpherson AK.
An interprovincial comparison of unintentional child-
hood injury rates in Canada for the period 2006-2012.
Can J Public Health 2018;109(4):573-580. doi:10.17269
/s41997-018-0112-z.
7. Panchal AR, Bartos JA, Cabañas JG, et al. Part 3: Adult
Basic and Advanced Life Support: 2020 American Heart
Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscita-
tion and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation 2020;
142(16_suppl_2):S366-S468. doi:10.1161/CIR.00000000
00000916.
8. Couper K, Abu Hassan A, Ohri V, et al. Removal of
foreign body airway obstruction: A systematic review of
interventions. Resuscitation 2020;156:174-181. doi:10.1016
/j.resuscitation.2020.09.007.
9. Bhanderi BG, Palmer Hill S. Evaluation of DeChoker, an
Airway Clearance Device (ACD) Used in Adult Choking
Emergencies Within the Adult Care Home Sector: A Mixed
Methods Case Study. Front Public Health 2020;8:541885.
doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.541885.
... To ensure a comprehensive analysis, we conducted a systematic literature review following the PRISMA 2020 statement [29] (registered with PROSPERO: CRD42023477631). [30] The research protocol, titled "Suction-Based Airway Clearance Devices for Foreign Body Airway Obstruction: Protocol for a Systematic Review," was published in Acta Biomedica. [30]. ...
... [30] The research protocol, titled "Suction-Based Airway Clearance Devices for Foreign Body Airway Obstruction: Protocol for a Systematic Review," was published in Acta Biomedica. [30]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of negative pressure, anti-choking devices (ACDs) in managing severe foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO) compared to traditional techniques such as the Heimlich maneuver. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in major databases to identify studies published within the past five years. Eligible studies were appraised for quality using the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction Tool. Data on study design, outcomes, and safety parameters were extracted and analyzed. Results: The review identified studies evaluating various ACDs, including LifeVac and DeChoker, in different settings and populations. Results from retrospective studies and trials on mannequins or cadavers suggested promising outcomes for ACDs in relieving FBAO, with success rates ranging from 71% to 99%. However, concerns regarding usability, training, and adverse events were raised, emphasizing the need for further research. Conclusions: Review emphasizes traditional maneuvers (thrusts/blows) for all rescuers. ACDs show promise, but further research is needed to determine their role alongside established methods. LifeVac's design may offer advantages in terms of ease of use, potentially requiring less dexterity compared to Dechoker. Regardless of the device, proper training remains crucial for optimal effectiveness and safe use. Combining ACDs with traditional methods like abdominal thrusts and back blows may be a promising approach for improving airway obstruction management.
Article
Full-text available
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
Article
Full-text available
Foreign Body Airway Obstruction (FBAO) is a medical emergency that can result in death, particularly if swift, appropriate action is not taken. It can be a frightening experience for all involved. DeChoker, an Airway Clearance Device (ACD), might provide an additional alternative in the management of choking; however, limited evidence around its safety and effectiveness makes adoption controversial. Objectives: An independent evaluation to explore the experiences of health and care professionals who used DeChoker in real-life adult choking emergencies, focusing on the product's safety, efficacy and ease of application. Design: Retrospective mixed methods case study, with multiple embedded units of analysis. Setting: UK adult care homes. Participants: Twenty seven incidents of adult choking emergencies self-reported by care home staff where DeChoker was used. This data was augmented by an in-depth exploration of four individual choking incidences. Results: The choking victim's ages range: 45 to 101 years (mean 79.8 years). The device was reported to have successfully removed the obstruction in 26 of 27 cases, with very few complications or adverse events reported. In 21 of 27 incidents (78%) the victim was not required to visit Accident and Emergency. Qualitative data indicated nursing home staff found the DeChoker easy to use and valued its presence as an adjunct to current guideline procedures. Conclusion: There is a dearth of evidence surrounding the management of choking and little innovation in this area for five decades. This retrospective evaluation contributes to discussion regarding the role ACDs might play in the management of choking, particularly in cases where current choking management guidance are ineffective, insufficient, inappropriate or impractical (e.g., frail or movement restricted people). The interview data presents a view from care home staff that the DeChoker, as an ACD, contributed to saving the life of choking victims.
Article
Full-text available
Introduction Foreign body airway obstruction (FBAO) is a major public health issue worldwide. In 2017, there were more than 5000 fatal choking cases in the USA alone, and it was the fourth leading cause of preventable injury-related death in the home and community. In Japan, FBAO is the leading cause of accidental death and with almost 9000 fatalities annually. However, research on FBAO is limited, particularly on the impact of a foreign body (FB) removal manoeuvres by bystanders. The primary objective of this study is to determine the impact of bystander FB removal manoeuvres on 1 month neurological outcome. Our secondary objectives include (1) evaluating the efficacy of a variety of FB removal manoeuvres; (2) identifying risk factors for unsuccessful removal and (3) evaluating the impact of time intervals from incidents of FBAO to FB removal on neurological outcome. Methods and analysis We will conduct a nationwide multi-centre prospective cohort study of patients with FBAO who present to approximately 100 emergency departments in both urban and rural areas in Japan. Research personnel at each participating site will collect variables including patient demographics, type of FB and prehospital variables, such as bystander FB removal manoeuvres, medical interventions by prehospital personnel, advanced airway management and diagnostic findings. Our primary outcome is 1 month favourable neurological outcome defined as cerebral performance category 1 or 2. Our secondary outcomes include success of FB removal manoeuvres and complications from the manoeuvres. We hypothesise that bystander FB removal manoeuvres improve patient survival with a favourable neurological outcome. Ethics and dissemination This study received research ethics approval from Nippon Medical School Hospital (B-2019-019). Research ethics approval will be obtained from all participating sites before entering patients into the registry. The study was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry. Trial registration number UMIN 000039907.
Article
Full-text available
Aim Despite an obstructed airway (choking) being a relatively preventable injury, it has a considerable mortality burden globally, with increasing incidence. Given new technologies in choking management, this systematic review aimed to assess current literature on the effectiveness of anti-choking suction devices at relieving obstructions. Methods Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL Plus and the English websites of the devices were searched on September 23, 2019. Studies were included if they reported the anti-choking devices’ dislodgment success rate (primary outcome) or associated adverse events (secondary outcome). Articles, conference abstracts or technical reports were included if peer reviewed. Certainty of evidence was assessed in accordance with GRADE. Results Five studies satisfied the inclusion criteria for this review. Two studies (40%) reported findings of a single centre mannequin trial, one (20%) of a single centre cadaveric trial, and two (40%) were case series. Cohen’s Kappa for the first and second round of screening was 0.904 and 0.674 respectively. Although several devices have been manufactured worldwide, the LifeVac© has been most extensively studied, with a combined dislodgement success rate of 94.3% on first attempt. However, certainty of evidence for the primary outcome was evaluated as very low. Conclusions There are many weaknesses in the available data and few unbiased trials that test the effectiveness of anti-choking suction devices resulting in insufficient evidence to support or discourage their use. Practitioners should continue to adhere to guidelines authored by local resuscitation authorities which align with ILCOR recommendations.
Article
The European Resuscitation Council has produced these basic life support guidelines, which are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. The topics covered include cardiac arrest recognition, alerting emergency services, chest compressions, rescue breaths, automated external defibrillation (AED), CPR quality measurement, new technologies, safety, and foreign body airway obstruction.
Article
Objective: To summarise in a systematic review the effectiveness of interventions to treat foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library from inception on 30th September 2019 for studies that described the effectiveness of interventions to treat FBAO in adults and children. We included randomised controlled trials, observational studies and case series (≥5 cases) that described evidence of benefit. For evidence of harm/complications, we included case reports. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility, extracted study data, and assessed risk of bias. Data are summarised in a narrative synthesis. The GRADE system is used to assess evidence certainty. Results: We included 69 publications, comprising three cross-sectional studies (557 patients); eight case series (755 patients), and 59 were case reports (64 patients). One paper was included as a case series and cross-sectional study. For all interventions and associated outcomes, evidence certainty was very low. Early removal of FBAO by bystanders was associated with improved neurological survival (odds ratio 6.0, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 23.4). Identified evidence showed that key interventions (back blows, abdominal thrusts, chest thrusts/compressions, Magill forceps, manual removal of obstructions from the mouth, suction-based airway clearance devices) are effective in relieving FBAO. We identified reports of harm in relation to back blows, abdominal thrusts, chest thrusts/compressions, and blind finger sweeps. Conclusions: Key interventions successfully relieve FBAO, but may be associated with important harms. Guidelines for FBAO management should balance the benefits and harms of interventions.
Article
Objectives: To perform an interprovincial comparison of unintentional population-based injury hospitalization and death rates for Canadian children ages 0-19 years and compare trends between 2006 and 2012. Methods: Annual population-based hospitalization rates per 100,000 from unintentional injuries were calculated for children/youth (< 19 years) using data from the Discharge Abstract Database between 2006 and 2012. Annual mortality rates were analyzed using provincial coronial data. The mean annual change in the rate of hospitalizations due to unintentional injuries was reported for each province. Results: The average annual rate of hospital admissions for unintentional injuries was 305.10 per 100,000 population between 2006 and 2012, and this decreased by - 11.91 over time (p < 0.01, - 15.85; - 7.77). Saskatchewan had the highest average annual morbidity rate (550.76 per 100,000) from all unintentional causes, and Ontario had the lowest average annual rate (238.89 per 100,000). Saskatchewan had the highest average annual rate for all subcauses except for drowning. Ontario was the only province with an average annual injury morbidity rate that was consistently below the Canadian average. The average annual mortality rate from all unintentional injury was highest in Saskatchewan (17.51 per 100,000) and lowest in Ontario (5.99 per 100,000) when compared to Canada (7.97 per 100,000). Conclusion: Injury prevention policies vary considerably among provinces. Although the unintentional injury hospitalization rate is decreasing over time, some subcauses such as choking/suffocation have shown an increase in certain provinces. Evidence-based childhood injury prevention policies, such as playground equipment safety and four-sided pool fencing among others, should be standardized across Canada.