Mechanical stability of endotracheal tube fixation: a performance comparison between two tube holders and a conventional method.
- 1Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
- 2Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. [email protected].
- 3Department of Health in Disasters and Emergencies, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. [email protected].
Abstract
Background
Accidental extubation remains a significant clinical concern in airway management, particularly in emergency and anesthetic settings. While commercial tube holders have shown improved fixation stability over adhesive tape, cost and availability limit their use in many healthcare systems. This study introduces a newly developed Iranian endotracheal tube (ETT) holder, Persifix, and evaluates its mechanical performance relative to a commercial Locktite model and the conventional adhesive tape method.Methods
A total of 170 controlled tests were conducted using a human airway manikin. Three fixation methods-adhesive tape, Persifix, and Locktite tube holders-were assessed under lateral and frontal force vectors using weights of 750 g and 1000 g. Displacement was measured in both depth and lateral dimensions under dynamic (tug) and static (non-tug) conditions. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests, with Bonferroni's post hoc comparisons (α = 0.05).Results
The adhesive tape method demonstrated significantly greater displacement in depth across most test conditions (e.g., left side, 1000 g, no tug: 2.54 ± 3.63 mm vs. Persifix: 1.76 ± 1.78 mm, p = 0.032; Locktite: 0.53 ± 0.44 mm, p < 0.001). In frontal force tests with 1000 g and tug, the Persifix showed reduced displacement (0.41 ± 0.16 mm) compared to both adhesive tape (2.62 ± 4.25 mm, p = 0.001) and Locktite (0.52 ± 1.33 mm, p = 0.032). Lateral displacement in width was also significantly lower with both tube holders (e.g., 750 g with tug: Persifix 3.34 ± 5.20 mm vs. adhesive tape 3.16 ± 15.00 mm, p = 0.005). No statistically significant differences were observed between the Persifix and Locktite tube holders in most conditions (p > 0.05), indicating comparable fixation stability.Conclusion
The Iranian tube holder, Persifix, demonstrated statistically significant reductions in ETT displacement compared to adhesive tape across multiple force vectors and weight conditions. Its mechanical performance was comparable to the commercial Locktite model, suggesting its potential utility as a cost-effective and clinically reliable alternative for airway stabilization in resource-limited settings.
Related
- Effects of thermocycling on color stability and mechanical properties of universal resin composites: an in vitro comparison.
- Comparison of Classic Laryngeal Mask Airway and Endotracheal Intubation for Airway Management During Short Urologic Procedures in the Prone Position: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
- Comparison of Hockey-Stick and Conventional Linear Ultrasound Transducers for Detection of Non-Displaced Dentoalveolar Fractures: An Ex Vivo Paired Comparative Study
- Comparison of Atheroma Burden Changes Using Conventional vs. End-Diastolic Intravascular Ultrasound Segmentation ― Post Hoc Analysis of the PACMAN-AMI Study ―
- Kinematic Alignment Using Conventional Mechanical-Alignment Instruments with 3D-Printed Tibial Recut Guide Versus Manual Mechanical Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty: An IPTW-Adjusted Comparative Cohort Study
BibTeX
@article{ghahnavieh2026mechanical,
title = {{Mechanical stability of endotracheal tube fixation: a performance comparison between two tube holders and a conventional method.}},
author = {Alireza Abootalebi Ghahnavieh and Mehran Haddadi and Mehdi Nasr Isfahani},
journal = {BMC anesthesiology},
year = {2026},
month = aug,
doi = {10.1186/s12871-026-04147-6},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42958043},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Mechanical stability of endotracheal tube fixation: a performance comparison between two tube holders and a conventional method.
AU - Alireza Abootalebi Ghahnavieh
AU - Mehran Haddadi
AU - Mehdi Nasr Isfahani
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/08/03
JO - BMC anesthesiology
DO - 10.1186/s12871-026-04147-6
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42958043
AB - Background Accidental extubation remains a significant clinical concern in airway management, particularly in emergency and anesthetic settings. While commercial tube holders have shown improved fixation stability over adhesive tape, cost and availability limit their use in many healthcare systems. This study introduces a newly developed Iranian endotracheal tube (ETT) holder, Persifix, and evaluates its mechanical performance relative to a commercial Locktite model and the conventional adhesive tape method.Methods A total of 170 controlled tests were conducted using a human airway manikin. Three fixation methods-adhesive tape, Persifix, and Locktite tube holders-were assessed under lateral and frontal force vectors using weights of 750 g and 1000 g. Displacement was measured in both depth and lateral dimensions under dynamic (tug) and static (non-tug) conditions. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests, with Bonferroni's post hoc comparisons (α = 0.05).Results The adhesive tape method demonstrated significantly greater displacement in depth across most test conditions (e.g., left side, 1000 g, no tug: 2.54 ± 3.63 mm vs. Persifix: 1.76 ± 1.78 mm, p = 0.032; Locktite: 0.53 ± 0.44 mm, p < 0.001). In frontal force tests with 1000 g and tug, the Persifix showed reduced displacement (0.41 ± 0.16 mm) compared to both adhesive tape (2.62 ± 4.25 mm, p = 0.001) and Locktite (0.52 ± 1.33 mm, p = 0.032). Lateral displacement in width was also significantly lower with both tube holders (e.g., 750 g with tug: Persifix 3.34 ± 5.20 mm vs. adhesive tape 3.16 ± 15.00 mm, p = 0.005). No statistically significant differences were observed between the Persifix and Locktite tube holders in most conditions (p > 0.05), indicating comparable fixation stability.Conclusion The Iranian tube holder, Persifix, demonstrated statistically significant reductions in ETT displacement compared to adhesive tape across multiple force vectors and weight conditions. Its mechanical performance was comparable to the commercial Locktite model, suggesting its potential utility as a cost-effective and clinically reliable alternative for airway stabilization in resource-limited settings.
SN - 1471-2253
ER -