| Literature DB >> 27274369 |
Wonuk Koh1, Hajung Kim1, Kyongsun Kim1, Young-Jin Ro1, Hong-Seuk Yang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An unexpected difficult intubation can be very challenging and if it is not managed properly, it may expose the encountered patient to significant risks. The intubation difficulty scale (IDS) has been used as a validated method to evaluate a global degree of intubation difficulty. The aims of this study were to evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of unexpected difficult intubation using the IDS.Entities:
Keywords: Difficult; Grade; Intubation; Scale; Unexpected
Year: 2016 PMID: 27274369 PMCID: PMC4891536 DOI: 10.4097/kjae.2016.69.3.244
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Anesthesiol ISSN: 2005-6419
Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS)
| Parameter | Points |
|---|---|
| Number of supplementary attempts | 1 point each |
| Number of supplementary operators | 1 point each |
| Number of alternative techniques | 1 point each |
| Cormack-Lehane grade minus one | 0 to 3 points |
| Lifting force required | Normal = 0 point |
| Increase = 1 point | |
| External laryngeal pressure applied | None = 0 point |
| Any = 1 point | |
| Vocal cord mobility | Abduction = 0 point |
| Adduction = 1 point |
IDS score = Sum of points.
Demographic Characteristics of the Study Patients
| Patient characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Gender (M/F) | 349 (36.7%)/602 (63.3%) |
| Age (yr) | 59.2 (15.8) (18–97)* |
| Height (cm) | 158.9 (9.7) |
| Weight (kg) | 63.4 (11.1) |
| Body mass index | 25.1 (3.7) |
| Dental status (normal/abnormal) | 786 (82.7%)/165 (17.4%) |
| Bony degeneration (yes/no) | 528 (55.5%)/423 (44.5%) |
| Attending anesthesiologist (Resident/Fellow/Faculty) | 508 (53.4%)/218 (22.9%)/225 (23.7%) |
The Values are Presented as Mean (SD) or Number (Percentage). *Indicates range.
Distributions of Intubation Difficulty Scale Parameters among the Study Patients
| Type of items | Number of patients in each intubation difficulty scale | R2* | Sensitivity (%)† | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| Additional attempts (N1) | 870 (91.5) | 66 (6.9) | 10 (1.1) | 2 (0.2) | 3 (0.3) | 0.488 | 87.3 |
| Additional operators (N2) | 932 (98) | 15 (1.6) | 4 (0.4) | 0 | 0 | 0.212 | 27.3 |
| Alternative techniques (N3) | 877 (92.2) | 71 (7.5) | 1 (0.1) | 2 (0.2) | 0 | 0.365 | 76.4 |
| Cormack-Lehane grade (N4) | 505 (53.1) | 292 (30.7) | 127 (13.4) | 27 (2.8) | - | 0.702 | 87.3 |
| Lifting force (N5) | 761 (80) | 190 (20) | - | - | - | 0.406 | 78.2 |
| Laryngeal pressure (N6) | 664 (69.8) | 287 (30.2) | - | - | - | 0.452 | 87.3 |
| Vocal core mobility (N7) | 927 (97.5) | 24 (2.5) | - | - | - | 0.093 | 21.8 |
The Values are Presented as Absolute Number (Percentage) or Percentage. *Adjusted R2 (Pearson's coefficient) presenting the relationship between total IDS score and components. Linear regression analysis was used. †Indicates sensitivity of IDS components to predict difficult intubation (IDS > 5) and the positive predictive value of each IDS component.