4. RESULTS
Demographic and anthropometric characteristics of the patients
summarized in Table 1.
Mean TV was higher and Median LW was lower in IOM comparing to CFM(Table
2) but SPO2 and ETCO2 were similar
between masks. Successful ventilation(Percentage of the patients with
Han Scale=1) were higher in IOM comparing to the CFM (Table 3)
Mean weight of the patients and median of the NC were higher in
unsuccessful mask ventilation(Han Scale>1) group for
CFM(p<0.05). Other demographic and anthropometric
characteristics were similar between successful and unsuccessful CFM
ventilation (Table 4).
Percentage of the patients with Mallampati I and Low OSAS risk
(STOP-BANG Score<3) were higher in successful CFM Ventilation.
Gender, ASA and Beard rates were similar between successful and
unsuccessful CFM ventilation (Table 5).
Mean BMI of the patients were higher in unsuccessful mask ventilation
(Han Scale>1) comparing to successful IOM ventilation
group. Other demographic and anthropometric characteristics were similar
between successful and unsuccessful IOM ventilation (Table6).
Percentage of the patients with Mallampati I was higher in successful
IOM Ventilation (Table 7) and Gender, ASA, OSAS risk and beard rates
were similar between successful and unsuccessful IOM ventilation.
There were no difference between anxiety ratings of practitioners
between using CFM and IOM. However practitioners rated the workload for
IOM higher in effort, mental demand sections and composite NASA-TLX
score than CFM (Table 8).