Comparison of Two Types of Videolaryngoscope and Direct Laryngoscope in Expected Non-difficult Airway Patients

Author(s):  
BMJ Open ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. e006416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tadahiro Goto ◽  
Yasuaki Koyama ◽  
Takashiro Kondo ◽  
Yusuke Tsugawa ◽  
Kohei Hasegawa

ObjectiveWe sought to determine whether the use of Pentax-AWS Airwayscope (AWS) applied less force on oral structures during intubation attempts than a conventional direct laryngoscope (DL).DesignProspective cross-over study.ParticipantsA total of 37 physicians (9 transitional-year residents, 20 emergency medicine residents and 8 emergency physicians) were enrolled.InterventionsWe used four simulation scenarios according to the difficulty of intubation and devices and used a high-fidelity simulator to quantify the forces applied on the oral structures.Outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were the maximum force applied on the maxillary incisors and tongue. Other outcomes of interest were time to intubation and glottic view during intubation attempts.ResultsThe maximum force applied on the maxillary incisors in the normal airway scenario was higher with the use of AWS than that with DL (107 newton (N) vs 77 N, p=0.02). By contrast, the force in the difficult airway scenario was significantly lower with the use of AWS than that of the DL (89 N vs 183 N, p<0.01). Likewise, the force applied on the tongue was significantly lower with the use of AWS than the use of DL in both airway scenarios (11 N vs 27 N, p<0.001 in the normal airway scenario; 12 N vs 40 N, p<0.01 in the difficult airway scenario).ConclusionsThe use of AWS during intubation attempts was associated with decreased forces applied to oral structures in the simulated difficult airway scenario.


Author(s):  
Dicha Niswansyah Auliyah ◽  
Prananda Surya Airlangga ◽  
Lilik Herawati

Introduction: McGrath® MAC videolaryngoscope is a single-handed device designed to facilitate intubation in patients both in patients with normal airway conditions (without any complications) or airway conditions with complications such as cervical spine and/or anatomic abnormalities. Objective: This study aims to compare McGrath® MAC videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope using Macintosh blades as learning material or study simulators for medical personnel (including anesthesiologist and paramedics) and novice operator (medical students). Method: this study is a systematic review using the PRISMA method which was carried out systematically. Data was collected through Pubmed, direct science, EBSCOHost, and Proquest using the keywords ‘airway management ', ‘laryngoscopy', and 'manikin'. Journal included based on published publication time between 2008 and 2020, a study using SimMan Laerdal Airway manikin, a journal discussing intubation using McGrath® MAC videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope with Macintosh blades here, where it is normal airway (without complications) and difficult airway. Results: 1556 journals were collected through 4 journal search sites and then carried out a screening process for the publication year approved in 2008 to 2020. Four studies use adult manikin SimMan Laerdal Airway including 247 participants were included in this systematic review. Conclusion: Based on journals that have been reviewed, McGrath® MAC videolaryngoscope provides better and superior results compared to Macintosh in terms of the success rate and visualization of glottis. Also, the intubation time using McGrath® MAC videolaryngoscope is shorten compared to Macintosh both on the normal airway (without complication) and difficult airway. The participants (medical personnel and novice operators) in all studies that reviewed prefer to use McGrath® Mac videolaryngoscope instead of using direct laryngoscope with Macintosh blade for Endotracheal Intubation mainly used for learning or study simulators.


2009 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 284
Author(s):  
Myong Sook Jeon ◽  
Chong Soo Kim ◽  
Jin Huh ◽  
Seong Won Min ◽  
Young Jin Ro ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 606-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiann-Ruey Ong ◽  
Chee-Fah Chong ◽  
Chien-Chih Chen ◽  
Tzong-Luen Wang ◽  
Chiu-Mei Lin ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document