Literature DB >> 23812581

Comparison of intubation performance between the King Vision and Macintosh laryngoscopes in novice personnel: a randomized, crossover manikin study.

Yuki Akihisa1, Koichi Maruyama, Yukihide Koyama, Rieko Yamada, Akira Ogura, Tomio Andoh.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The King Vision laryngoscope is a newly developed video laryngoscope. We conducted a simulation study to evaluate the efficacy of the King Vision in novice personnel.
METHODS: Thirty-one registered nurses with no previous experience with tracheal intubation were enrolled. Participants made 6 consecutive attempts at intubation of the manikin's trachea with a Macintosh laryngoscope (MAC) and the King Vision with channeled blade (KVC) and non-channeled blade (KVNC) in a randomized cross-over fashion. The Grading Scale of Intubation Difficulty (GSID) was rated on a 5-point scale.
RESULTS: Overall median (range) intubation times (sec) were 16.9 (8.0-60.0) with the MAC, 20.5 (7.2-60.0) with the KVC, and 60.0 (11.0-60.0) with the KVNC. The KVNC required significantly longer intubation time compared with the MAC or the KVC (p < 0.001). Success rate with the KVNC was 47.3 %, which was significantly inferior to that with the MAC (91.4 %) or KVC (86.6 %). Median GSID was 2 (range 1-5) with the KVC and 3 (1-4) with the MAC, which were both significantly lower than the 4 (2-5) with the KVNC (p < 0.001). Esophageal intubation with the MAC occurred in 18 of 186 attempts, whereas no incidents of esophageal intubation occurred with the KVC or KVNC.
CONCLUSION: The KVC facilitated intubation by novice personnel without incidence of esophageal intubation. However, intubation times, success rates, and GSID scores were similar to the values obtained with the MAC. These findings suggest that the KVC, but not the KVNC, could be used as an alternative device for intubation by novice personnel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23812581     DOI: 10.1007/s00540-013-1666-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anesth        ISSN: 0913-8668            Impact factor:   2.078


  23 in total

1.  Laryngoscopic intubation: learning and performance.

Authors:  Julian T Mulcaster; Joanna Mills; Orlando R Hung; Kirk MacQuarrie; J Adam Law; Saul Pytka; David Imrie; Chris Field
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 7.892

2.  Ease of intubation with the GlideScope or Macintosh laryngoscope by inexperienced operators in simulated difficult airways.

Authors:  Yvonne Lim; Tian-Jin Lim; Eugene H C Liu
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2004 Jun-Jul       Impact factor: 5.063

Review 3.  Evaluation of airway equipment: man or manikin?

Authors:  M R Rai; M T Popat
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2010-11-22       Impact factor: 6.955

4.  Evaluation of intubation using the Airtraq or Macintosh laryngoscope by anaesthetists in easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy--a manikin study.

Authors:  C H Maharaj; B D Higgins; B H Harte; J G Laffey
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 6.955

5.  Evaluation of the Airway Scope, a new video laryngoscope, in tracheal intubation by naive operators: a manikin study.

Authors:  T Miki; G Inagawa; T Kikuchi; Y Koyama; T Goto
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.105

6.  Comparison of the Glidescope, the McGrath, the Airtraq and the Macintosh laryngoscopes in simulated difficult airways*.

Authors:  G L Savoldelli; E Schiffer; C Abegg; V Baeriswyl; F Clergue; J L Waeber
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 6.955

7.  Use of the Airtraq laryngoscope in a model of difficult intubation by prehospital providers not previously trained in laryngoscopy.

Authors:  M Woollard; W Mannion; D Lighton; I Johns; P O'meara; C Cotton; M Smyth
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 6.955

8.  A comparison of tracheal intubation using the Airtraq or the Macintosh laryngoscope in routine airway management: A randomised, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  C H Maharaj; D O'Croinin; G Curley; B H Harte; J G Laffey
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 6.955

9.  The GlideScope Video Laryngoscope: randomized clinical trial in 200 patients.

Authors:  D A Sun; C B Warriner; D G Parsons; R Klein; H S Umedaly; M Moult
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2004-11-26       Impact factor: 9.166

10.  Tracheal intubation by non-anesthesia residents using the Pentax-AWS airway scope and Macintosh laryngoscope.

Authors:  Yoshihiro Hirabayashi; Norimasa Seo
Journal:  J Clin Anesth       Date:  2009-06-06       Impact factor: 9.452

View more
  17 in total

Review 1.  Evolution of videolaryngoscopy in pediatric population.

Authors:  Anju Gupta; Ridhima Sharma; Nishkarsh Gupta
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2021-04-10

2.  The AirView Study: Comparison of Intubation Conditions and Ease between the Airtraq-AirView and the King Vision.

Authors:  Patrick Schoettker; Jocelyn Corniche
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Comparison of VividTrac®, Airtraq®, King Vision®, Macintosh Laryngoscope and a Custom-Made Videolaryngoscope for difficult and normal airways in mannequins by novices.

Authors:  Szilárd Rendeki; Dóra Keresztes; Gábor Woth; Ákos Mérei; Martin Rozanovic; Mátyás Rendeki; József Farkas; Diána Mühl; Bálint Nagy
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 2.217

4.  Comparison of King Vision and Truview Laryngoscope for Postextubation Visualization of Vocal Cord Mobility in Patients Undergoing Thyroid and Major Neck Surgeries: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Anto Sahaya Priyanka; Kusha Nag; V R Hemanth Kumar; Dewan Roshan Singh; Senthil Kumar; T Sivashanmugam
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar

5.  Comparison of intubation success and glottic visualization using King Vision and C-MAC videolaryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine injuries with cervical immobilization: A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Dhanyasi Shravanalakshmi; Prasanna U Bidkar; K Narmadalakshmi; Suman Lata; Sandeep K Mishra; S Adinarayanan
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2017-02-06

6.  Transfer of skills and comparison of performance between king vision® video laryngoscope and macintosh blade following an AHA airway management course.

Authors:  Lukas E Wolf; José A Aguirre; Christian Vogt; Christian Keller; Alain Borgeat; Heinz R Bruppacher
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 2.217

7.  Supraglottic airway device versus a channeled or non-channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope for accidental extubation in the prone position: A randomized crossover manikin study.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Oshika; Yukihide Koyama; Masataka Taguri; Koichi Maruyama; Go Hirabayashi; Shoko Merrit Yamada; Masashi Kohno; Tomio Andoh
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 1.889

8.  Intubation with channeled versus non-channeled video laryngoscopes in simulated difficult airway by junior doctors in an out-of-hospital setting: A crossover manikin study.

Authors:  Shi Hao Chew; Jonathan Zhao Min Lim; Benjamin Zhao Bin Chin; Jia Xin Chan; Raymond Chern Hwee Siew
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Case Report: Double lumen tube insertion in a morbidly obese patient through the non-channelled blade of the King Vision (™) videolaryngoscope.

Authors:  Mohamed El-Tahan; D John Doyle; Alaa M Khidr; Ahmed G Hassieb
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2014-06-17

10.  Using King Vision video laryngoscope with a channeled blade prolongs time for tracheal intubation in different training levels, compared to non-channeled blade.

Authors:  Marc Kriege; Christian Alflen; Ruediger R Noppens
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.