RES-Q-VAC

ARTICLES

Anaesthesia 1996 Jan;51(1):63-8

A practical evaluation of four human-powered portable airway aspirators.

Arnstein FE

Department of Anaesthesia, Edinburgh Royal Infirmary.

The establishment of a clear airway is a vital part of basic life support and mechanical devices are available to assist the clearance of the upper airway during resuscitation. The performances of four human-powered devices, currently available in the United Kingdom, were compared with the relevant British Standard. The ease of use of the devices by 20 experienced and 20 novice resuscitators was assessed. Three of the four devices met all British Standard criteria tested whereas the fourth failed on one test only. These devices are generally simple to use. However, two devices ('Res-Q-Vac' and 'Ambu Maxi Suction Pump') were more user friendly. The incidence of airway contamination during resuscitation and the current recommended resuscitation protocols suggest that there is a need for increased emphasis on these airway adjuncts in life-support training. Wider access to basic life support equipment inside and outside hospital premises may improve resuscitation outcome.

Anaesthesia 1993 Sep;48(9):807-9

Evaluation of three portable suction devices.

Simon EJ, Davidson JA, Boom SJ

Department of Anaesthesia, Western Infirmary, Glasgow.

Three portable suction devices were evaluated and compared with a wall-mounted vacuum driven suction unit. The Repro-med Res-Q-Vac, the Drager Sujector 2000 and the Laerdal suction unit were assessed by measuring the time taken to aspirate 140 ml of mock gastric contents. The respective times for each device, expressed as mean and (range) were 7.39 (4.3-10.4), 8.6 (7.8-9.4) and 11.4 (9.4-12.6) s. These compare favourable with the Ohmeda suction unit (7.27 (6.2-8.9)). Each type of device has advantages and disadvantages when factors such as size, power supply and portability are considered, and each will be the most suitable for a particular situation.