Comparison of the Efficiency of Mouth-to-nose Breathing With Mouth-to-mouth Breathing

Completed · Not applicable

Conditions studied: Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Respiratory Physiology

In brief

The purpose of this study is to find out the best way of providing artificial breathing during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Current standard CPR involves giving mouth-to-mouth breathing to people requiring CPR. The rescuer pinches the person's nostrils closed and breathes into the mouth of the unconscious person with his or her own mouth. Some CPR studies have shown that it might be easier and more effective to breathe air into a person's nose instead of the mouth. People receiving CPR often have blocked airways, so breathing into the mouth does not always work. We think mouth-to-nose breathing may be more efficient and easier to do. In this case, the rescuer closes the person's mouth by pushing the jaw up and holding it still. Then the rescuer breathes into the unconscious person's nose by covering the nose entirely with his or her mouth. We are doing this study to try to find out which way works better. We will perform both ways of breathing on people who are unconscious (asleep) before planned (non-emergency) surgery and compare their effectiveness.

Key facts

Study ID
NCT00785447
Run by
Massachusetts General Hospital
People needed
20
Starts
2008-03-01
Expected to finish
2010-01-01
Last updated by the study team
2012-04-25

Who can join

Age: 18 and older, up to 59. Sex: any. Healthy volunteers: not accepted.

You may qualify if…

You may not qualify if…

Where it is running

Full record on ClinicalTrials.gov

Trial information comes from ClinicalTrials.gov and is refreshed daily. TrialsForMe does not provide medical care and does not run the studies it lists.