Literature DB >> 21064263

Assessment of the storz video Macintosh laryngoscope for use in difficult airways: A human simulator study.

Aaron E Bair1, Kalani Olmsted, Calvin A Brown, Tobias Barker, Daniel Pallin, Ron M Walls.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Video laryngoscopy has been shown to improve glottic exposure when compared to direct laryngoscopy in operating room studies. However, its utility in the hands of emergency physicians (EPs) remains undefined. A simulated difficult airway was used to determine if intubation by EPs using a video Macintosh system resulted in an improved glottic view, was easier, was faster, or was more successful than conventional direct laryngoscopy.
METHODS: Emergency medicine (EM) residents and attending physicians at two academic institutions performed endotracheal intubation in one normal and two identical difficult airway scenarios. With the difficult scenarios, the participants used video laryngoscopy during the second case. Intubations were performed on a medium-fidelity human simulator. The difficult scenario was created by limiting cervical spine mobility and inducing trismus. The primary outcome was the proportion of direct versus video intubations with a grade I or II Cormack-Lehane glottic view. Ease of intubation (self-reported via 10-cm visual analog scale [VAS]), time to intubation, and success rate were also recorded. Descriptive statistics as well as medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs) are reported where appropriate. The Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test was used for comparison testing of nonparametric data.
RESULTS: Participants (n = 39) were residents (59%) and faculty. All had human intubation experience; 51% reported more than 100 prior intubations. On difficult laryngoscopy, a Cormack-Lehane grade I or II view was obtained in 20 (51%) direct laryngoscopies versus 38 (97%) of the video-assisted laryngoscopies (p < 0.01). The median VAS score for difficult airways was 50 mm (IQR = 28–73 mm) for direct versus 18 mm (IQR = 9–50 mm) for video (p < 0.01). The median time to intubation in difficult airways was 25 seconds (IQR = 16–44 seconds) for direct versus 20 seconds (IQR = 12–35 seconds) for video laryngoscopy (p < 0.01). All intubations were successful without need for an invasive airway.
CONCLUSIONS: In this simulation, video laryngoscopy was associated with improved glottic exposure, was perceived as easier, and was slightly faster than conventional direct laryngoscopy in a simulated difficult airway. Absence of secretions and blood limits the generalizability of our findings; human studies are needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21064263     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00867.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  5 in total

1.  A comparison of video laryngoscopy to direct laryngoscopy for the emergency intubation of trauma patients.

Authors:  Maria Michailidou; Terence O'Keeffe; Jarrod M Mosier; Randall S Friese; Bellal Joseph; Peter Rhee; John C Sakles
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Truview PCD-video laryngoscope aided nasotracheal intubation in case series of orofacial malignancy with limited mouth opening.

Authors:  Archita Rajaram Patil; Kalpana Rajendra Kulkarni; Rajaram Shankar Patil; Samrat Sukumar Madanaik
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015 Apr-Jun

3.  A review of the literature: direct and video laryngoscopy with simulation as educational intervention.

Authors:  Allison A Vanderbilt; Julie Mayglothling; Nicholas J Pastis; Douglas Franzen
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2014-01-28

4.  Comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope to the Macintosh laryngoscope for intubation of blunt trauma patients in the ED.

Authors:  Erkan Goksu; Taylan Kilic; Gunay Yildiz; Aslihan Unal; Mutlu Kartal
Journal:  Turk J Emerg Med       Date:  2016-02-22

5.  An Assessment of Intubation Skill Training in Novice Anesthesiology Residents of Tehran University of Medical Sciences With the Use of Mannequins.

Authors:  Farhad Etezadi; Atabak Najafi; Pejman Pourfakhr; Reza Shariat Moharari; Mohammad Reza Khajavi; Farsad Imani; Gilda Barzin
Journal:  Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2016-09-19
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.