Yoshihiro Hirabayashi1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Jichi Medical University, 3311-1 Yakushiji, Shimotsuke-shi, Tochigi 329-0498, Japan. yhira@jichi.ac.jp
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of the Airway Scope for tracheal intubation with that of the Macintosh laryngoscope for direct laryngoscopy. METHODS: 10 anaesthetists, 10 residents, 10 nurses and 10 students intubated the trachea of a manikin using the Airway Scope or the Macintosh laryngoscope in each of 4 laryngoscopy scenarios. RESULTS: Within each group of operators, there was no significant difference in the time taken for intubation between the Airway Scope and the Macintosh laryngoscope. However, the overall number of teeth clicks was less in the Airway Scope, and the Airway Scope scored better on the visual analogue scale than did the Macintosh laryngoscope. CONCLUSION: The Airway Scope performed as well as and perhaps better than the Macintosh laryngoscope when used on a manikin.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of the Airway Scope for tracheal intubation with that of the Macintosh laryngoscope for direct laryngoscopy. METHODS: 10 anaesthetists, 10 residents, 10 nurses and 10 students intubated the trachea of a manikin using the Airway Scope or the Macintosh laryngoscope in each of 4 laryngoscopy scenarios. RESULTS: Within each group of operators, there was no significant difference in the time taken for intubation between the Airway Scope and the Macintosh laryngoscope. However, the overall number of teeth clicks was less in the Airway Scope, and the Airway Scope scored better on the visual analogue scale than did the Macintosh laryngoscope. CONCLUSION: The Airway Scope performed as well as and perhaps better than the Macintosh laryngoscope when used on a manikin.