PURPOSE: Videolaryngoscopes may not be useful in the presence of vomitus due to blurred images on the monitor. The objective of our study is to compare the utility of gum-elastic bougie (GEB) application for tracheal intubation with the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL), which is a direct laryngoscope, with that of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope® (AWS) and McGRATH® MAC (McGRATH) in simulated vomitus settings. METHODS:Sixteen novice doctors performedtracheal intubation on an adult manikin using McL, AWS, and McGRATH with or without GEB under normal and vomitus simulations. RESULTS: In the normal setting the tracheal intubation was successful with the three laryngoscopes regardless of GEB application. In the vomitus setting, the intubation success rate did not significantly improve using McL, while it did using McGRATH or AWS. In the normal settings, GEB application significantly lengthened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. By contrast, in the vomitus settings, GEB application significantly shortened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. For the comparison of three laryngoscopes, the intubation time did not differ significantly in normal setting, while it was significantly longer in McG and AWS trials than McL trial. CONCLUSION: The GEB application facilitates the tracheal intubation in the vomitus setting using McGRATH and AWS in adult simulation.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Videolaryngoscopes may not be useful in the presence of vomitus due to blurred images on the monitor. The objective of our study is to compare the utility of gum-elastic bougie (GEB) application for tracheal intubation with the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL), which is a direct laryngoscope, with that of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope® (AWS) and McGRATH® MAC (McGRATH) in simulated vomitus settings. METHODS: Sixteen novice doctors performed tracheal intubation on an adult manikin using McL, AWS, and McGRATH with or without GEB under normal and vomitus simulations. RESULTS: In the normal setting the tracheal intubation was successful with the three laryngoscopes regardless of GEB application. In the vomitus setting, the intubation success rate did not significantly improve using McL, while it did using McGRATH or AWS. In the normal settings, GEB application significantly lengthened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. By contrast, in the vomitus settings, GEB application significantly shortened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. For the comparison of three laryngoscopes, the intubation time did not differ significantly in normal setting, while it was significantly longer in McG and AWS trials than McL trial. CONCLUSION: The GEB application facilitates the tracheal intubation in the vomitus setting using McGRATH and AWS in adult simulation.
Authors: Christopher W Root; Oscar J L Mitchell; Russ Brown; Christopher B Evers; Jess Boyle; Cynthia Griffin; Frances Mae West; Edward Gomm; Edward Miles; Barry McGuire; Anand Swaminathan; Jonathan St George; James M Horowitz; James DuCanto Journal: Resusc Plus Date: 2020-05-21