A copy of this work was available on the public web and has been preserved in the Wayback Machine. The capture dates from 2018; you can also visit the original URL.
The file type is
The authors hypothesized that mouth ventilation by a resuscitator via the nasal route ensures a more patent airway and more effective ventilation than does ventilation via the oral route and therefore would be the optimal manner to ventilate adult patients in emergencies, such as during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. They tested the hypothesis by comparing the effectiveness of mouth-to-nose breathing (MNB) and mouth-to-mouth breathing (MMB) in anesthetized, apneic, adult subjects without muscledoi:10.1097/aln.0b013e31821d6c69 pmid:21572315 fatcat:tvm7e53wpfchta6ohvoufbbcde