top of page
PEER-REVIEWED
Shown to help bring ventilations closer to published guidelines,
even if less-experienced team members are on the bag.
In controlled studies, physicians, nurses and EMTs were handed the ButterflyBVM with minimal-to-no prior instruction. Despite this, ventilations landed inside the target range much more often with the ButterflyBVM than with a traditional BVM — and the least experienced hands did the best.
In peer-reviewed studies:
10x
ADVANCED PROVIDERS WERE
more likely to hit target minute ventilations with the ButterflyBVM than with the Ambu Spur II
[Odds ratio 10.5 (95% CI 4.1–26.5), p<0.001, with no instruction given before use.]
73.8%
of breaths were within recommended ranges with the ButterflyBVM vs 32.1% when using the Ambu Spur II
[42 clinicians with infant and adolescent manikins.]
2 vs 76
THERE WERE
peak pressure failures from the ButterflyBVM vs the Ambu Spur II over 1,880 analyzed breaths
[Even when they were given a manometer to guide them, users with the Ambu Spur II exceeded peak pressure targets 55 times.]
bottom of page