| Literature DB >> 33008485 |
Ye Sun1, Hua Fan2, Xiao-Xia Song1, Hua Zhang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to compare three fixation methods for orotracheal intubation.Entities:
Keywords: Critical illness; Endotracheal intubation; Holder; Intensive care unit (ICU); Teeth pad
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33008485 PMCID: PMC7532601 DOI: 10.1186/s40001-020-00446-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Med Res ISSN: 0949-2321 Impact factor: 2.175
Fig. 1Adhesive tape and twill tape fixation: "Y" shape
Fig. 2Adhesive tape and twill tape fixation: "I" shape
Fig. 3Fixator method
Fig. 4Specific operational process
Fig. 5Tear the tape into "I" shape
Fig. 6"Walker" disposable bite block
Comparison of general data before tracheal intubation among the three groups
| Items | The twill tape method ( | The fixator method ( | The alternation method ( | Test statistic | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male/female | 14/17 | 20/11 | 22/11 | 3.644 | 0.162 |
| Average age (years old) | 75.3 ± 10.9 | 70.1 ± 14.6 | 67.0 ± 15.7 | 2.840 | 0.064 |
| NEWS | 5.3 ± 1.9 | 5.9 ± 1.5 | 5.3 ± 1.4 | 1.625 | 0.203 |
| GCS | 3.2 ± 0.5 | 3.2 ± 0.5 | 3.2 ± 0.7 | 0.086 | 0.918 |
Comparison of facial and lip injuries, tongue injuries, teeth loosening and catheter displacement among three groups
| Groups | Facial and lip injuries | Tongue injuries | Teeth loosening | Catheter displacement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The twill tape method | 16/31 (51.6%) | 14/31 (45.2%) | 16/31 (51.6%) | 12/31 (38.7%) |
| The fixator method | 18/31 (58.1) | 24/31 (77.4)a | 27/31 (87.1)a | 11/31 (35.5)c |
| The alternation method | 26/33 (78.8) | 31/33 (93.9)b | 30/33 (90.9)b | 23/33 (69.7)b |
aCompared between the twill tape method and the fixator method, P < 0.05
bCompared between the twill tape method and the alternation method, P < 0.05
cCompared between the fixator method and the alternation method, P < 0.05