Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Bench evaluation: three face-shield CPR barrier devices.

M Simmons1, D Deao, L Moon

  • 1School of Respiratory Therapy, York College and York Hospital, PA, USA.

Respiratory Care
|June 1, 1995
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Measurement of the charge asymmetry in top quark pair production in <i>pp</i> collisions at [Formula: see text] using the ATLAS detector.

The European physical journal. C, Particles and fields·2015
Same author

Measurement of [Formula: see text] production with a veto on additional central jet activity in <i>pp</i> collisions at [Formula: see text] TeV using the ATLAS detector.

The European physical journal. C, Particles and fields·2015
Same author

Measurement of the top quark mass with the template method in the [Formula: see text] channel using ATLAS data.

The European physical journal. C, Particles and fields·2015
Same author

Search for heavy neutrinos and right-handed <i>W</i> bosons in events with two leptons and jets in <i>pp</i> collisions at [Formula: see text] with the ATLAS detector.

The European physical journal. C, Particles and fields·2015
Same author

Study of e(+)e(-)→ωχ(cJ) at center of mass energies from 4.21 to 4.42 GeV.

Physical review letters·2015
Same author

Search for Higgs boson pair production in the γγbb[over ¯] final state using pp collision data at sqrt[s]=8  TeV from the ATLAS detector.

Physical review letters·2015
Same journal

Response to the Letter to the Editor Regarding "Comparative Evaluation of Risk Scores for Predicting Postoperative Pulmonary Complications".

Respiratory care·2026
Same journal

Respiratory Muscle Dysfunction in Stable COPD: A Multimodal Assessment of Diaphragmatic and Cough-Related Impairment.

Respiratory care·2026
Same journal

Flow Asynchronies During Pressure Support Ventilation in Children: A Bench Model Study.

Respiratory care·2026
Same journal

Inspiratory Effort Assessment Using the Occlusion Pressure-Derived Tension-Time Index.

Respiratory care·2026
Same journal

Clinical Usage of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Across Disease Categories and Care Settings: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Japan.

Respiratory care·2026
Same journal

Efficacy of Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation Devices as Analyzed in Lung Models: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Peak Expiratory Flow Data.

Respiratory care·2026
See all related articles

Face shields (FS) for rescue breathing deliver less volume than mouth-to-mouth (M-M) and do not meet American Heart Association standards. One brand, Res-Cue Key (RCK), showed significant backward leak, posing a potential risk.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Devices
  • Emergency Medical Equipment
  • Airway Management

Background:

  • Mouth-to-mouth (M-M) rescue breathing is infrequently performed due to disease transmission fears.
  • CPR barrier devices, including face shields (FS), have been developed to mitigate these risks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the volume delivered during mouth-to-face shield (M-FS) breathing.
  • To measure back pressure, calculate resistance through 1-way valves, and test for backward gas leak in FS devices.

Main Methods:

  • Three face shield brands (Kiss of Life, MicroSHIELD, Res-Cue Key) were tested.
  • Volume delivery was assessed using 10 rescuers on a CPR mannequin.
  • Back pressure, resistance, and backward leak were measured using airflow and O2 concentration analysis.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Mouth-to-Mouth (M-M) delivered a mean volume of 1.00 L, while FS devices delivered less: MicroSHIELD (0.77 L), Res-Cue Key (0.64 L), and Kiss of Life (0.24 L).
  • Back pressures varied, with MicroSHIELD showing the highest at 16.7 cm H2O.
  • Significant backward leak was detected only with the Res-Cue Key (RCK) device.

Conclusions:

  • None of the tested face shields met all American Heart Association or International Standards Organization requirements.
  • The Res-Cue Key device exhibited backward leak, a critical safety concern.