Talk:Choking

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MostlyCaffeine, Ameliaw. Peer reviewers: Copene, Jeffyang13.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

What to do?!

back slaps

ok at st john ambulance brigade in canada, back slaps are discouraged (for reasons in article) except for infants

tjwood from the UK has different information

anyone else experience in first aid have comments?

Yes, tonight I was choking on a very small piece of candy (outside coating of a Vitaball - vitamin gumball - and couldn't breathe hardly at all. I was gasping for air, and my husband thumped me hard on the back, which helped. Or at least, it was better after that and I am fine now. - Suzanne

I have used back slaps before in helping others in partial blockage and have found it to be productive (I have worked in the medical field for a few years). I have done this because of how well it works without doing any damage (such as bruising to ribs or diaphram). I start out with a medium slap and go harder if there is no result. It also helps if the patient leans forward. Mothers have been using this method on thier children for centuries, don't change it if it works. I am not knocking the Heimlich, it is a very productive way to remove objects from the airway and is necessary in many cases, just not all cases. Just my opinion based on my experience. Christy

Back Slaps.

   Dr. Henry Heimlich, the inventor of the Heimlich Maneuver, wrote today in a letter to the New York Times "Backslaps are proved to cause death by driving a choking object tighter into the airways." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/opinion/l06heimlich.html?ref=opinion.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by NapoleonW (talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC) 

Chest Punch

Punch him/her in the chest and hope for the best, this actually works grannies advise--McNoddy 13:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd been trained that you never slap on the back as it can shake the food lower in the throat, making things worse as you go from a partially-obstructed airway to a completely blocked one. And C. Everett Coop backs me up! Though this is from 1985, and a more recent article disagrees. It's pretty long. And written by Peter Heimlich. Anyone have anything solid? The page seems like it needs a re-write with attentiont to the controversy. WLU 14:08, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

WPMED assessment comment

These comments illustrate some common perceptions (or misperceptions) that people have about choking. I think that a clear, NPOV discussion of these perceptions not only belongs in the article, but would make the article considerably more interesting. --Una Smith (talk) 18:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Only humans can choke

My linguistics professor has told me that, because of the nature of the human vocal tract, humans are the only animals that can choke on food because no other animal has a common tube that seperates into the esophagus and trachea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hurricane Omega (talk • contribs) 01:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Not true. Dogs pant, demonstrating a common tube. In fact my dog, Jake, recently choked (and nearly died) on a large, wet, unraveling piece of rawhide. zowie 06:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

So are you saying that rawhide can, contrary to what the Blues Brothers would have you believe, stop them doggies moving? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.148.128.82 (talk) 15:25, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Dogs can also choke on small objects such as tennis balls if they get trapped in their mouths. my dog died of eating socks.

Please discuss this in the article. Also discuss choking in horses. Horses choke in two senses: this one, unrelated to choking in humans; and related to choking in humans. However, this second sense usually involves a pathological condition. Horses normally have separate throat and airway, with the larynx allowing communication between them: see Larynx#Descended_larynx. A veterinarian usually will insert a stomach tube through the horse's nose. --Una Smith (talk) 18:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Illustration

The illustration of a CGI man is not helpful to this page; the multicolored background and variety of shadows on the choking man are too distracting to really show the concept of choking. 71.196.224.59 17:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I DISAGREE! I THINK THE PICTURE IS FINE! THE RENDERING IS QUALITY AND WHOEVER MADE IT HAS GOOD TEETH. i did not make it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.59.214 (talk) 21:32, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Why the rainbow background? This picture is ridiculous. 98.26.52.199 (talk) 02:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

WPMED assessment

I assessed the article as start class (see the infobox at the top of this talk page). A lot of comments and questions on this talk page appear not to have been incorporated in the article. --Una Smith (talk) 22:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Foreign objects

The article says most choking is caused by foreign objects and states (without reference) that most choking takes place in children (no reference for this) by foreign objects (hmm). Is food a "foreign object"? fish&karate 10:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

In short - yes. A foreign object, or foreign body if you prefer, is any object originating outside the body, so food, toys, anything. On that basis, this clearly falls within the policy that commonly known things do not require citation, but i've added a couple anyway, along with a clarifcation on 'foreign object', in case anyone else is unsure on the meaning. I have therefore also removed the tags. Regards, OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 12:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

That's great, and very helpful. Thanks Owain. fish&karate 06:10, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Capitalization of "Heimlich Maneuver"

Is there any reason why it's "Heimlich Maneuver" rather than "Heimlich maneuver", in the same fashion as, say, "Parkinson's disease"? Robert K S (talk)

The answer seems to be that "Heimlich Maneuver" is a registered service mark of Heimlich Institute Foundation Inc. Robert K S (talk) 01:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Can someone undo the last few edits?

Currently, the whole intro, pic, and med info box that used to be there are gone and replaced with "Choking is the Flyers." Last good version I see in history is dated 00:43, 15 December 2013. Sorry if this is the wrong way to ask, but this is my first time using a talk page and can't fix it myself :( 76.114.24.23 (talk) 07:32, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Med student contributors workplan

Hi, we are two UCSF medical students editing this article as part of a class in Winter 2017. Here is our workplan:

Why?

• This article is high importance, but start quality
• We think this article has significant public health relevance and that people might google it, wanting immediate info.
• AmeliaW is going into Peds and MostlyCaffeine is going into EM.

Team: Ameliaw & MostlyCaffeine

Initial Analysis:

• Overly complicated intro
• Lack of visual media
• Lack of algorithms
• Lack of data (on epi, risk factors, etc)
• Treatment section needs organization - possible schemes include by symptom (ex. Breathing or not breathing) or by cause

What will you add?

• Images/Video
• Signs and Symptoms
• Treatment - Pediatric and tools (self-heimlich stick)
• Risk factors - age, swallowing conditions, level of consciousness
• Complications - aspiration, epidemiology
• Prevention - pediatric recommendations

What will you augment?

• Links to appropriate content - Airway management
• Treatment - alogrithms, visual media

What will you decrease coverage of?

• Notable Cases of Choking - Clint Eastwood, Mama Cass

Team Coordination Plan:

• Google folder of resources and notes
• Phone call to check-in 1-2days prior to each WIP
• WIP Presenter on 12/1, 12/11 - Kadia
• WIP Presenter on 11/27, 12/6, 12/15, (plus one make-up) - Amelia

Team Content Assignments

• AmeliaW - Revise intro, treatment (pediatric maneuvers), prevention, epidemiology, relevant images
• MostlyCaffeine - Organizing treatment section, treatment misperceptions (backslaps, chest punches), airway managements (links, algorithms), risk factors, complications, relevant images

Timeline:

Week 1 (11/19 - 11/25) Week 2 (11/26 - 12/02) Week 3 (12/03 - 12/09) - Drafts of changes Peer Review: 12/7 - 12/12 Week 4 (12/10 - 12/16) MostlyCaffeine (talk) 23:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC) Ameliaw (talk) 23:12, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review of Amelia W

Hi there!

I have just completed the peer review for AmeliaW, encompassing lead section, pediatric treatment, prevention, epidemiology and images as detailed in your work plan. For more detailed and specific edits, please see word document emailed separately.

Overall, a really thoughtful and thorough approach to the topic of choking that was very well- written. The language used was predominantly active, and usually struck a nice balance between being informative and easy to read.

Pediatric treatment—Not edited because in progress

Prevention-Not edited because in progress

Lead section-Very nice overview of the definition, epidemiology, and sequelae of choking. Per word document emailed separately, I would make a few structural rearrangements of this section. Nice balance between defining and hyperlinking as well.

Epidemiology—Concise and to the point. Very readable and well-cited. Could add more info as to why choking risk increases at age 74. If there is info on the frequency of choking due to specific items: food vs foreign body, that could be a nice addition.

Photos--Helpful, informative, and clear visual aids given

Copene (talk) 03:23, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Peer review for MostlyCaffeine

Hi! I am peer reviewing for MostlyCaffeine's work on the choking article, particularly for sections on organizing treatment, treatment misperceptions (backslaps, chest punches), airway management (links, algorithm), risk factors, complications, and relevant images as described in workplan.

Overall, the article is wonderful and is a very easy read for anybody browsing the internet hoping to learn more about choking and ways to treat. I really liked how you simplified the signs and symptoms into simple bullet points and explained the variability in symptoms and what to expect. I think you can consider talking a little bit more about the different severity levels of choking, from coughing and speaking to complete occlusion with no air movement. You do mention it, but I think it can be flushed out some more and give the reader an idea of how worried they should be. Along those lines, perhaps recommendations as to when to call EMS can also be included.

With regards to treatment misperceptions, I think you can consider adding more information about "myths" or what someone definitely should not do for individuals choking.

Risk factors - great section in the cause part.

Images - very clear - good image on self treatment tool

Airway management - Can potentially consider adding more about positioning and others things to be wary about during choking. The part about emergency cricothyrotomy can probably be flushed out more. Whether you want to include how the procedure is done is completely up to you, but the reader can potentially be better informed as to what these emergency procedure entails. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffyang13 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Back blows against choking in adult.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Back slap cartoon

File:Back blows (back slaps) against choking for adult people.jpg

Is this an appropriate image for a medical article, to illustrate "delivering forceful slaps with the heel of the hand on the victim's back, between the shoulder blades"? It looks like the rescuer is being advised to raise their arm vertically and slap with the flat palm of the hand, which isn't the case. I removed the image as misleading some time ago but it has been added back to the article. --Lord Belbury (talk) 13:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

NOTHOWTO template

What is the point of marking this article as containing instructional information? I get this is not the purpose of Wikipedia, but it also seems like this might be one of the first places someone who is choking (or helping someone who is choking) might go. Radioactivated (talk) 15:28, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree. It seems to me that an article like this must describe what the treatment is. It also appears to me that the treatments are worded here as descriptions of treatments as recommended by various medical bodies, rather than as instructions to the reader. If the article were giving instructions, it would have wording such as,

• "How to treat a choking incident:
• 1. Check if casualty is....
• 2. Give five blows to the back by...
• 3. If casualty responds during step two, cease giving back blows.
• 4. If after the fifth back blow, the casualty has not responded to treatment, then..."

So it seems to me the article is doing the correct thing: describing how various medical bodies advocate that treatment is done, *not* giving instructions. The template is asking readers to "improve" the article, when the article seems to already be doing the correct thing: describing what the various medical bodies say. So I propose the template should be removed.Fh1 (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 August 2022 and 20 September 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tranhar.ucsf, Belvedere123, Z1a2i3 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Dashdon, Vlee2013.

— Assignment last updated by Mkaur8 (talk) 23:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Workplan (Changes Made)

Hello! I am one of the group members from UCSF who edited the Choking page. My team members will reply on this post with their edits.

Here is a list of my edits:

- New Diagnosis section: Choking is a clinical diagnosis (act of choking due to obstruction) and the obstruction and be diagnosed via imaging modalities

- Added more info to Prevention section: verified resources and added two ways choking is prevented in children (regulations and anticipatory guidance)

As a group, we rearranged the sections to matched higher rated articles (signs and symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, etc.)

Tranhar.ucsf (talk) 00:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Several typos fixed and a peer review was posted!

Dashdon 09/15/2022 — Preceding undated comment added 06:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Peer review for UCSF medical students (2022)

Introduction and lead provides a good high-level overview and summary. It also details the importance of the article by listing that choking is the fourth most common cause of unintentional death. Tone is neutral overall New diagnosis section provides a helpful overview using language that is easy to understand. I noticed that some of the references from the AHA in this section are from the early 2000s. Perhaps those guidelines still hold today, but I would encourage the editors to see if more recent changes have been made. I also like the reorganization of the different sections that the group performed, it made the flow more natural and easier to navigate. Citations overall appear complete and of the ones that I clicked on, were properly linked. The editors and authors also used many credible sources such as the AHA, American Red Cross, CDC, etc. The balance of the article is well-done with informative information but also visuals and other types of description and language that makes it easy to follow. Vlee2013 (talk) 23:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

You missed 4 PubMed citations for anti-choking devices :) --Nbauman (talk) 13:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Anti-choking devices

I did a PubMed search on "Lifevac" to see how legit they were after I saw all those TV commercials. There were 9 citations, of which 6 were more recent than the 2020 study cited in this entry. None of them had funding from manufacturers. They included LifeVac and DeChoker. The effectiveness is ambiguous. They couldn't remove grapes or cashews from cadavers. LifeVac seemed to have some benefits over DeChoker. There was one study of 124 cases using manufacturer-supplied data. I'm not sure how or whether you could do a randomized, controlled trial. I'd have to read the studies (all of them free PMC articles) before I came to any conclusions. --Nbauman (talk) 13:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: WikiMed Fall 2023

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 October 2023 and 17 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hopper1828 (article contribs).

Work Plan: I will be focused on editing signs and symptoms (adding citations, additional statistics, and more information), diagnostics (providing more detail about what these diagnostic tests entail, what they are looking for, and how frequently they find the diagnosis), and eventually in infant and pediatrics specific treatment and prevention if I have time.

— Assignment last updated by Hopper1828 (talk) 16:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hopper1828 (talk) 14:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review

Lead

N/A

Content

I like the summarized history section, especially how it establishes a timeframe and progression, but I'm not sure "retroactively seen" refers to or means in context. Is it like witnesses remember after the fact but don't usually notice/register during the event or was this statistic discovered through a retroactive study?

I also appreciate the statistics that you added in the Respiratory and Skin sections, as it may be helpful to contextualize symptoms that may or may not always be present.

Tone and Balance

I think that the content you added is written with an appropriate tone and neutral.

Sources and References

Everything added has a citation.

Organization

I like the organizational changes you made to the Signs and Symptoms section with the History section.

Images and Media

N/A

Overall Impressions

I think that your edits have made it more clear for the reader what to expect when witnessing — sounds like details that would be helpful in identifying choking in the real world.

Guo9810 (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this feedback. I will take your wording suggestion into account as I continue to make changes. I appreciate your insight and the organization of your feedback that makes it clear to understand the strengths and weaknesses of my edits. Hopper1828 (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Grammar & factual errors

hey there! i’ve noticed that this article has numerous grammatical & factual errors (incorrect organizational names, risk factors, etc) throughout that make me suspect a GPT may have been used to edit/rewrite some or all of the content here.

this article may well be where someone turns for information during an emergency (see above talk topics), so it feels imperative that we are providing comprehensible and accurate information. Nortsapa (talk) 03:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)