UMOX™: A New Device for Preoxygenation

NCT ID: NCT01841255

Last Updated: 2013-04-26

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

49 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2008-09-30

Study Completion Date

2008-11-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Background - Preoxygenation is performed before general anesthesia to increase the oxygen reserves of the body and prolong the safe period of apnea without hypoxia. However, it is often impossible to obtain a perfect face mask fit, and optimal end-tidal fractional oxygen concentration (EtO2) are not attained. The investigators designed a new oropharyngeal preoxygenation device, UMOX™, to avoid leaks during preoxygenation. In this study, the investigators compared the efficacy of UMOX™ with that of a conventional face mask.

Methods - In 50 healthy volunteers breathing 100% oxygen from a circle absorber system for a 5 minute-period, the investigators compared preoxygenation using the 1) a conventional mask; 2) UMOX™ without any instruction; 3) UMOX™ with instruction on mouth breathing; and 4) UMOX™ with a nose clip, in random order. Each subject underwent all steps with a 10-minute rest period of room air breathing between each step. Inspired and end-tidal respiratory gases were measured every 10 seconds. EtO2 variation was analyzed using Anova.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This study was as a single center, crossover, randomized trial. Following approval from research and ethics committee from our hospital and written consent from healthy subjects recruited, 50 consenting volunteers were enrolled over a three-month period, from: September 29, 2008 to November 5, 2008.

Subjects enrolled were of both genders, smokers and non-smokers, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II, 18 to 65 years old. Nonrecruitment depended on the presence of any craniofacial abnormality, facial hair (beard or moustache) or absence of teeth. Well-controlled non-severe asthma was not a criterion for exclusion.

The trial was conducted in an operating room, using the Dräger Fabius GS (Dräger, Canada), anesthesia machine in a usual set up with the operating table. The investigators used a, patient circuit system consists of 1.5-L lime soda absorber connected to disposable corrugated tubing and a 2-L breathing bag. Gases were analyzed through a Marquette Medical Systems™ SAM module (GE Healthcare), volumes monitored with a GE Respirator Mechanics-M (GE Healthcare) and SpO2 measured with a Nellcor™ (Covidien) pulse oximetry positioned on a finger. Preoxygenation procedures were explained to the subjects and ample time was allowed so they could become familiar with the mask and mouth piece. Set up for the measure was conducted by the same experimenter. Subjects laid supine and preoxygenation was performed with fresh gas flow: 100% oxygen (O2) 10L/minute, administered trough facemask or mouth piece sequentially in a random order. Randomization was established with a random assignment table (ww.randomization.com). The envelope was open as the subject entered the operating room (OR). At the beginning and between each step, the anesthesia circuit was flushed with 100% (O2). Each subject went through all steps in random order, each requiring a 5-min period of: 1) tidal breathing using the facemask (TVFM); 2) tidal volume breathing with the UMOXTM mouthpiece (TVMP); 3) tidal volume breathing with the UMOXTM mouthpiece and verbal instructions to favor mouth breathing (TVMPMB); (4) tidal volume breathing with the UMOXTM mouthpiece and a nose clip (TVMPNC). The experimenter conducting the steps instructed participants to create a seal with their lips around the mouthpiece and readjusted the facemask when the subject signalled a discernable leak. Each step was interrupted by 10 minutes of breathing normal room air to allow for return to original respiratory status. Continuous recording of experimental measures, displayed on the anesthesia monitoring system, was done on digital films (Canon PowershotS5 IS™). For the purpose of our trial, 10 seconds intervals were considered adequate for following preoxygenation trends. End-tidal O2 was measured continuously for 5 min. We have also evaluated the level of satisfaction of the subject with each technique using a 1-4 scale.Participants were asked to asses their comfort by showing the associated number with their fingers. Finally we described the performance of the facemask ventilation technique as reported by the experimenter on a scale of 1 to 4.Primary outcome was the end-tidal O2 at the end of the 5-minutes preoxygenation period. Secondary outcomes included endtidal O2 as a function of time, the number of subjects reaching at least 87% EtO2, subject satisfaction and ease of ventilation.

Based on the few studies available on different preoxygenation technques, the end-tidal oxygen fraction standard deviation can range from 5% to about 20% depending on the device used for preoxygenation3,4,14,15. Assuming a 12% value for standard deviation, sample size calculations were made for Type I and Type II errors of 5% and 20%, respectively (power of 80%). From these numbers and taking account that we would rely on multiple comparisons, the power analysis suggested that 50 subjects would allow us to find a difference between groups around 9%. The 9nvestigators analyzed the EtO2 final value with one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey's Multiple Comparisons test. Percentage of participants reaching at least 87% EtO2 are described with survival curves compared with Kaplan-Meier log rank test. Tolerance is presented using Kruskal-Wallis with Dunn's Multiple Comparisons test.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Healthy

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Tidal breathing using the facemask

Control

Group Type SHAM_COMPARATOR

facemask

Intervention Type DEVICE

Tidal volume breathing with the UMOXTM, device, no instruction

First experimental measure

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Mouthpiece (Umox)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Device used to perform preoxygenation in the operating room context

Tidal volume breathing with the UMOXTM device, instructions

Second experimental measure

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Mouthpiece (Umox)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Device used to perform preoxygenation in the operating room context

Tidal volume breathing with the UMOXTM, device, nose clip

Third experimental measure

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Mouthpiece (Umox)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Device used to perform preoxygenation in the operating room context

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Mouthpiece (Umox)

Device used to perform preoxygenation in the operating room context

Intervention Type DEVICE

facemask

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Umox

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Both genders
* smokers and non-smokers
* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II
* 18 to 65 years old.

Exclusion Criteria

* Presence of any craniofacial abnormality
* facial hair (beard or moustache) or absence of teeth.
* Well-controlled non-severe asthma was not a criterion for exclusion.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Louis-Philippe Fortier

Chief of Staff, Anesthesiology Dep.

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Louis P Fortier, MD, MSc

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Université de Montréal

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

06108

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Management of Moderately Hypoxemic Thoracic Trauma
NCT03997630 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA
OM2 Motion Verification Study
NCT06415786 COMPLETED