![]() ![]() This study compared 4 subglottic secretion management interventions in patients needing mechanical ventilation in an ICU. One prospective controlled cohort study (Lorente et al. Both compared the TaperGuard Evac oral tracheal tube (with subglottic secretion drainage) with conventional endotracheal tubes for mechanical ventilation in ICU patients. 2013) and 1 randomised controlled trial published in the form of a conference abstract only (Saito et al. A decision was made to extubate the patient and re‑intubate with a replacement tube.Ī literature search identified 1 fully published randomised controlled trial (Mahmoodpoor et al. The user reported that pretesting of the cuff had been performed, but that the balloon on the endotracheal tube appeared to be porous. In another event (September 2013), during mechanical ventilation an alarm related to leakage alerted the healthcare provider. The tube needed to be replaced but no additional harm to the patient was reported. In 1 of the events (April 2014), when a nurse changed the tube, she found that the inflation line had been cut and was on the bed, near the patient's neck. ![]() These reports related to endotracheal tubes but the brand of the device was not stated, so it is not clear whether these refer to the TaperGuard Evac oral tracheal tube. Two events with a TaperGuard device were identified from searches of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database: Manufacturer and User Device Facility Experience (MAUDE). A search of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) website revealed no manufacturer Field Safety Notices or Medical Device Alerts for the TaperGuard Evac oral tracheal tube. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |