Literature DB >> 9830856

Pediatric endotracheal tube selection: a comparison of age-based and height-based criteria.

D Davis1, L Barbee, D Ririe.   

Abstract

Many methods are taught and used clinically to determine what size uncuffed endotracheal tube is required for the pediatric patient. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two methods of selection used clinically: (1) the traditional age-based (AB) formula; (age in years +16) divided by 4, and (2) the method based on body length using the Broselow pediatric resuscitation tape. Following institutional review board approval, 174 patients were prospectively studied after informed consent was obtained. Uncuffed endotracheal tube size selection was determined by randomly assigning the patient to one of the two groups. The appropriateness of the tube selection was assessed using an audible air leak around the endotracheal tube. No difference was found between the AB group and the resuscitation tape group with respect to selecting the appropriate size of endotracheal tube. Retrospective analysis of all patients found another AB formula that is occasionally used ([age in years +18] divided by 4) to be correct in only 20 (11%) of 174 cases. This was significantly different from the other methods (P < .001). Since the AB formula ([age in years +16] divided by 4) is reliable and easily applied, it appears acceptable for routine anesthesia cases in the pediatric population requiring endotracheal intubation. The AB formula ([age in years +18] divided by 4) should be used cautiously because of the high failure rate. In circumstances in which general information, such as age, is not available and endotracheal intubation is needed, the Broselow tape allows reliable endotracheal tube size identification and should be readily available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9830856

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AANA J        ISSN: 0094-6354


  8 in total

Review 1.  [Endotracheal tubes in pediatric patients. Published formulas to estimate the optimal size].

Authors:  M von Rettberg; E Thil; H Genzwürker; C Gernoth; J Hinkelbein
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  The Accuracy of the Broselow™ Pediatric Emergency Tape for Weight Estimation in an Omani Paediatric Population.

Authors:  Azher A Al-Busaidi; Lakshmanan Jeyaseelan; Hilal M Al-Barwani
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2017-06-20

3.  Ultrasonographic Estimation of Endotracheal Tube Size in Paediatric Patients and its Comparison with Physical Indices Based Formulae: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Jagadish G Sutagatti; Ranjana Raja; Madhuri S Kurdi
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-05-01

4.  Anesthetic management of two cases of Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome.

Authors:  Yoshinobu Kimura; Yasuhiro Kamada; Saori Kimura
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2008-02-27       Impact factor: 2.078

5.  Validity of Broselow tape for estimating weight of Indian children.

Authors:  Vivek Shah; Sandeep B Bavdekar
Journal:  Indian J Med Res       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 2.375

6.  Prediction of endotracheal tube size in children by predicting subglottic diameter using ultrasonographic measurement versus traditional formulas.

Authors:  Shubhi Singh; Parul Jindal; Priya Ramakrishnan; Shailendra Raghuvanshi
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun

7.  Derivation and validation of a formula for paediatric tracheal tube size using bootstrap resampling procedure.

Authors:  M Ganesh Kumar; Meenakshi Atteri; Yatindra K Batra; Lakshminarayana Yaddanapudi; Sandhya Yaddanapudi
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2019-06

8.  Age-based prediction of uncuffed tracheal tube size in children to prevent inappropriately large tube selection: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Hiroshi Hanamoto; Hiroharu Maegawa; Mika Inoue; Aiko Oyamaguchi; Chiho Kudo; Hitoshi Niwa
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 2.217

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.