Literature DB >> 14739798

Antichemical protective gear prolongs time to successful airway management: a randomized, crossover study in humans.

Ron Flaishon1, Alexander Sotman, Ron Ben-Abraham, Valery Rudick, David Varssano, Avi A Weinbroum.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Airway management is the first step in resuscitation. The extraordinary conditions in mass casualty situations impose special difficulties in airway management, even for experienced caregivers. The authors evaluated whether wearing surgical attire or antichemical protective gear made any difference in anesthetists' success of airway control with either an endotracheal tube or a laryngeal mask airway.
METHODS: Fifteen anesthetists with 2-5 yr of residency and wearing either full antichemical protective gear or surgical attire intubated or inserted laryngeal masks in 60 anesthetized patients. The study was performed in a prospective, randomized, crossover manner. The duration of intubation/insertion was measured from the time the device was grasped to the time a normal capnography recording was obtained.
RESULTS: Endotracheal tubes were introduced significantly (P < 0.01) faster when the anesthetist wore surgical attire (31 +/- 7 vs. 54 +/- 24 s for protective gear), but the mean times necessary to successfully insert laryngeal masks were similar (44 +/- 20 s for surgical attire vs. 39 +/- 11 s for protective gear). Neither performance failure nor incidences of hypoxemia were recorded.
CONCLUSIONS: This first report in humans shows to what extent anesthetists' wearing of antichemical protective gear slows the time to intubate but not to insert a laryngeal mask airway compared with wearing surgical attire. Laryngeal mask airway insertion is faster than tracheal intubation when wearing protective gear, indicating its advantage for airway management when anesthetists wear antichemical protective gear. If chances for rapid and successful tracheal intubation under such chaotic conditions are poor, laryngeal mask airway insertion is a viable choice for airway management until a proper secured airway is obtainable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14739798     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200402000-00013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  6 in total

1.  Securing the prehospital airway: a comparison of laryngeal mask insertion and endotracheal intubation by UK paramedics.

Authors:  C D Deakin; R Peters; P Tomlinson; M Cassidy
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 2. 

Authors:  J P Nolan; C D Deakin; J Soar; B W Böttiger; G Smith; M Baubin; B Dirks; V Wenzel
Journal:  Notf Rett Med       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 0.826

3.  Personal protection equipment for biological hazards: does it affect tracheal intubation performance?

Authors:  K B Greenland; D Tsui; P Goodyear; M G Irwin
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 5.262

4.  Maintenance of Skill Proficiency for Emergency Skills With and Without Adjuncts Despite the Use of Level C Personal Protective Equipment.

Authors:  Harsh Sule; Miriam Kulkarni; Gregory Sugalski; Tiffany Murano
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-03-27

5.  Comparison of Miller and Airtraq laryngoscopes for orotracheal intubation by physicians wearing CBRN protective equipment during infant resuscitation: a randomized crossover simulation study.

Authors:  Pierre-Géraud Claret; Renaud Asencio; Damien Rogier; Claire Roger; Philippe Fournier; Tu-Anh Tran; Mustapha Sebbane; Xavier Bobbia; Jean Emmanuel de La Coussaye
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  Intubation performance using different laryngoscopes while wearing chemical protective equipment: a manikin study.

Authors:  H Schröder; N Zoremba; R Rossaint; K Deusser; C Stoppe; M Coburn; A Rieg; G Schälte
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.