Articles on Baby Vac
A running nose - The importance of sucking out the stagnant nasal secretion.
Why is the child coughing if he/she has not got a running nose?
Efficiency test of the babyvac by the Medical University of Vienna
Endorsments from Medical Professionals
A video of How to use the Baby Vac
Please read our (Baby Vac) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page, where you can find more information about the use of Arianna Baby Vac.
  • Clinically tested and approved by the Universitat Ulm Klinik in German
  • Paediatricians and ENT specialists recommend it
  • Safe for newborns, toddlers and infants
  • Works fast
  • Easy to clean

Notified on the Ministry of Health Medsafe Database

Tested, and Preferred by
UNIVERSITAT ULM KLINIK


click here to read the
Efficiency Test result

VIENNA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY
PAEDIATRIC AND YOUTH HOSPITAL

EFFICIENCY TEST OF THE BABY VAC FOR COLD TREATMENT

Professor Dr. Arnold Pollak
Professor Dr. Dieter Koller

May 2005

Summary of the Baby Vacís performance

  • The child and his parents feel better
  • The child breathes more easily
  • The child can sleep much better
  • The child drinks and eats more
  • The parents are more relaxed
  • Suitable for children aged 0 to 6 years
  • A simple and easy-to-use device
  • A vacuum cleaner (between 800 watts and 1500 watts) and a nose suction pipe combined
    for gentle nasal cleaning

Preliminary Result 1

The Baby Vac is as efficient a cold treatment as the classical therapy.

Question 1: How does the child's nose get obstructed?

With the Baby Vac / Without the Baby Vac

General feeling: 0 on a scale from 0 to 10

10 = very bad, 0 = very good

Preliminary Result 2

The Baby Vac greatly improves liquid intake. Children who use the device feel much better.

Question 2: The child's liquid intake habits

General feeling: 0 on a scale from 0 to 10

10 = very bad, 0 = very good

Preliminary Result 3

Children using the Baby Vac can sleep much better.

Question 3: The child's sleeping habits

General feeling: 0 on a scale from 0 to 10

10 = very bad, 0 = very good

 

Test Data


Test period: February and March 2005

Institution and officials in charge: Paediatric and Youth Hospital, Professor Dr. Arnold Pollak and Professor Dr. Dieter Koller

Subjects: 31 children aged 1 month to 12 months (representative sampling for the group aged 0 to 6 years)

15 children received standard treatment (Otrisal administered 6 times a day)
16 children treated with the Baby Vac in addition to specialist treatment (nasal secretion extracted 4 to 5 times a day)

Observation period: 5 days

Scale: Visual Analogue Scale from 0 to 10 cm (10 = very bad, 0 = very good)

 

1. Test Methodology

The test was performed by Professor Dr. Arnold Pollak and Professor Dr. Dieter Koller at the Paediatric and Youth Hospital in February and March 2005. The test was aimed to assess the way in which the new Baby Vac distributed in Austria would perform concerning children's cold. The course of the cold was observed in a total of 32 children aged 1 month to 12 months. The questionnaire was returned by 31 parents (97%). The physicians applied the classical treatment, i.e. they administered Otrisal 6 times a day to each child. In the case of 16 children (50% of the patients) they prescribed for parents the use of the Baby Vac 4 to 5 times a day. The questionnaire included the following items:

How did your child's nose get stopped?
Does your child drink well?
Does your child sleep well?

For answer evaluation purposes the 0 to 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale was used, '10' meaning very bad and '0' being very good. The research report indicates average values for two groups: "with the Baby Vac" and "without the Baby Vac".

The observation period lasted 5 days. On Day 1 a question was asked about the subjects' condition, and then this was repeated 2 and 5 days later.

2. Results

The observation period yielded the following results:

Question 1: How did your child's nose get stopped?

Without therapy / with therapy
Without the Baby Vac / with the Baby Vac

As had been expected, nasal obstruction was curable with increasing ease during the observation period. No material difference was identified between both therapies. The Baby Vac proved to be as efficient in the treatment of cold as the classical therapy.

Note, however, that whenever babies and toddlers catch a cold, it is vital to remove their nasal secretion on a continuous basis to prevent any further diseases and complications. Since the observation period was limited to 5 days, there was no way to find out about long-term performance. Yet, it is right to suggest that the use of the Baby Vac and keeping the nose unobstructed may reduce long-term adverse effects.

2.2. The child's drinking habits

The observation period yielded the following results:

Question 2: The child's drinking habits

Without therapy / with therapy
Without the Baby Vac / with the Baby Vac

As is well-known, babies with an obstructed nose find it harder to breathe through the mouth. Since babies must breathe while drinking, nasal obstruction may largely affect their drinking. Consequently, a question was asked to find out about the children's drinking habits, general feeling, and free nasal breathing.

In this respect the performance of the Baby Vac was found to be clearly positive. On Day 1 the average drinking habit ranked 5 on a scale of 10. As early as the beginning of therapy the Baby Vac group showed clearly better drinking habits. By Day 3 this group had nearly attained 1 on a scale of 10 while the control group only attained that value 2 days later. On Day 5 the Baby Vac group attained 0, the highest value.

This clearly demonstrates that the test group drank much better. In conclusion, these children feel better because of their unobstructed noses.

2.3. The children's sleeping habits

The observation period yielded the following results:

Question 3: The child's sleeping habits

Without therapy / with therapy
Without the Baby Vac / with the Baby Vac

Changes in children's sleeping habits were taken as a sign of improved breathing and general feeling because children normally sleep worse with breathing difficulties, and that is also responsible for parents' discomfort.

Once again the Baby Vac performed much better than the classical treatment. On Day 1 both groups complained about children's bad sleep (scoring 8 on a scale of 10). As soon as Day 2 the test group's sleeping exceeded the average (scoring 4 on a scale of 10), and continued to improve up until Day 5, when it scored 1.

In this case, too, the control group only showed a slow improvement and reached 4 only 2 days later than the test group.

In summary, children slept better after using the Baby Vac.

3. Summary

The research report clearly points to the conclusion that the Baby Vac has a positive effect on the treatment of children's cold. In general, children's breathing is improved after nasal secretion has been removed and their nostrils have become unobstructed. In addition, children drink much more and sleep better. Ultimately, this has a positive effect on parents' comfort.

The Baby Vac improves breathing and the general feeling and prevents any further diseases.

The device is handy and comfortable for parents and highly efficient. The combination of vacuum cleaner and nose extractor is excellent in nasal cleaning.

The device is particularly suitable for the treatment of children aged 0 to 6 years and even premature babies once discharged from hospital.

Based on the test results we can recommend this device for use in hospitals, surgeries and at home as a supplement to specialist treatment.

 

up

 

 

© 2004-2006 art design media