scholarly journals Comparison of Video Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope for Face-to-Face Intubation in Sitting Manikin Model With Limitation of Neck Motion by Unexperienced Personnel

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-28
Author(s):  
Phatthranit Phattharapornjaroen ◽  
Promphet Nuanprom ◽  
Prayoot Suk-um ◽  
Manina Thilarak ◽  
Chaiyaporn Yuksen
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Vocal Cord ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
Intubation Technique ◽  
Cervical Spine Injuries ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Spine Injuries

Background: Trauma patients who entrapped in the accident vehicle are predispose to have cervical spine injuries and they needed to be intubated with face-to-face intubation technique using Macintosh laryngoscope. Nowadays, video laryngoscope has been introduced to improve the intubation technique. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope for face-to-face intubation in sitting manikin model with limitation of neck motion. Methods: The study was performed in a randomized experimental study. Subjects were divided into 2 groups both did face-to-face intubation using video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope in a sitting manikin model with limitation of neck motion. The success rate of intubation, time to finish intubation, and vocal cord visualization were analyzed. Results: Of 41 subjects including 2nd and 3rd year paramedic students, 21 subjects went to video laryngoscope group, and 20 subjects went to Macintosh laryngoscopes group. The Macintosh laryngoscope intubation technique showed significantly better success rate compared to video laryngoscope (100% and 25%, P < .001). In addition, intubation time of Macintosh laryngoscope was significantly less than video laryngoscope (mean [SD], 27 [24.7] and 75 [66.3] seconds, P < .001). However, vocal cord visualization from both laryngoscope techniques showed no statistically significant (P = .08). Conclusions: Intubation training of Macintosh laryngoscope for in sitting model with neck motion limitation showed better success rate and less time than video laryngoscope, with the same vocal cord visualization.  

scholarly journals Should the Glidescope video laryngoscope be used first line for all oral intubations or only in those with a difficult airway? A review of current literature

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (12) ◽  
pp. 322-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terrie-Marie Russell ◽  
Anil Hormis ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Difficult Airway ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Review Literature ◽  
Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
First Line ◽  
Glottic View ◽  
Glidescope Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Difficult Airways

The purpose of this study was to review literature that looked into the efficacy of the Glidescope video laryngoscope versus the Macintosh laryngoscope in oral endotracheal intubations. We aimed to answer the question ‘Should the Glidescope video laryngoscope laryngoscopes be used as first line intubation aids or only in the difficult airway?’ A systematic search of electronic databases was made. The inclusion criteria included: Glidescope, video laryngoscope, and Macintosh laryngoscope in human studies. The study aimed to compare first attempt success rate, glottic view and intubation time in papers dating between 2009 and 2017. Eleven trials with a total of 7,919 patients with both difficult and normal airways were included. The trials showed an improvement in first attempt success rate and glottic view with the Glidescope video laryngoscope especially in those with difficult airways. Overall time to intubate showed no significant differences between the Glidescope video laryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope although it was identified that with increased training and experience with the Glidescope video laryngoscope, intubation time was reduced. Glidescope video laryngoscopes show advantages over the Macintosh laryngoscopes in obtaining better glottic views in those with difficult airways. However its use is not supported in all routine intubations.

scholarly journals Comparison of i-Gel as a Conduit for Intubation between under Fiberoptic Guidance and Blind Endotracheal Intubation during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Simulation Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Hyun Young Choi ◽  
Wonhee Kim ◽  
Yong Soo Jang ◽  
Gu Hyun Kang ◽  
Jae Guk Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Endotracheal Intubation ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
Chest Compressions ◽  
Intubation Technique ◽  
Endotracheal Tubes ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Hoc

Purpose. This study aimed to compare intubation performances among i-gel blind intubation (IGI), i-gel bronchoscopic intubation (IBRI), and intubation using Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL) applying two kinds of endotracheal tube during chest compressions. We hypothesized that IGI using wire-reinforced silicone (WRS) tube could achieve endotracheal intubation most rapidly and successfully. Methods. In 23 emergency physicians, a prospective randomized crossover manikin study was conducted to examine the three intubation techniques using two kinds of endotracheal tubes. The primary outcome was the intubation time. The secondary outcome was the cumulative success rate for each intubation technique. A significant difference was considered when identifying p<0.05 between two devices or p<0.017 in post hoc analysis of the comparison among three devices. Results. The mean intubation time using IGI was shorter (p<0.017) than that of using IBRI and MCL in both endotracheal tubes (17.6 vs. 29.3 vs. 20.2 in conventional polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tube; 14.6 vs. 27.4 vs. 19.9 in WRS tube; sec). There were no significant (p<0.05) differences between PVC and WRS tubes for each intubation technique. The intubation time to reach 100% cumulative success rate was also shorter in IGI (p<0.017) than that in IBRI and MCL in both PVC and WRS tubes. Conclusions. IGI was an equally successful and faster technique compared with IBRI or MCL regardless of the use of PVC or WRS tube. IGI might be an appropriate technique for emergent intubation by experienced intubators during chest compressions.

Macintosh laryngoscope, i-view™, and C-MAC® video laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box: A randomized, crossover, manikin study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiyuki Nakanishi ◽  
Yoshiki Sento ◽  
Yuji Kamimura ◽  
Kazuya Sobue
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Tracheal Intubation ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Interquartile Range ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
Lehane Grade ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Difficulty Scale

Abstract Background: The aerosol box was designed to prevent cough droplets from spreading, but it can impede tracheal intubation. We tested the hypothesis that the C-MAC® video laryngoscope (C-MAC) with an external display is more useful than the i-view™ video laryngoscope (i-view) with an integrated display, or a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box.Methods: This prospective, randomized, crossover simulation study was conducted at an operating room of the two hospitals (a university hospital and a tertiary teaching hospital). We recruited 37 medical personnel (36 anesthesiologists and 1 dental anesthesiologist) who were working in the fields of anesthesia and intensive care with > 2 years of dedicated anesthesia experience from five hospitals. We divided the participants into six groups to use the laryngoscope in a determined order. After the training using each laryngoscope without a box, the participants performed tracheal intubation thrice with each laryngoscope with at least two-hour intervals. The primary outcome was the intubation time. The secondary outcomes were the success rate, Cormack-Lehane grade, and subjective difficulty scale score (numeric rating scale 0–10, 0: no difficulty, 10: highest difficulty). We used the Friedman test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni adjustment. Data are shown as median [interquartile range].Results: Thirty-seven personnel (11 women and 26 men) with 12 [5–19] (median [interquartile range]) years of anesthesia and intensive care experience were enrolled. There was no significant difference in the intubation time: 30 [26–32] s for Macintosh, 29 [26–32] s for i-view, and 29 [25–31] s for C-MAC (P=0.247). The success rate was 95%–100% without significant difference (P=0.135). The i-view and C-MAC video laryngoscopes exhibited superior Cormack-Lehane grades and lower subjective difficulty scale scores than the Macintosh laryngoscope; however, there were no differences between the i-view and C-MAC video laryngoscopes.Conclusions: Rapid and highly successful tracheal intubation was possible with Macintosh laryngoscope, i-view, and C-MAC video laryngoscopes on a manikin with an aerosol box. Improved Cormack-Lehane grade and ease of procedure may support the use of video laryngoscopes.Trial registration: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, identifier UMIN000040269.

scholarly journals A Randomized Comparison Simulating Face to Face Endotracheal Intubation of Pentax Airway Scope, C-MAC Video Laryngoscope, Glidescope Video Laryngoscope, and Macintosh Laryngoscope

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyun Young Choi ◽  
Young Min Oh ◽  
Gu Hyun Kang ◽  
Hyunggoo Kang ◽  
Yong Soo Jang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Emergency Medical Technicians ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Ventilation Time ◽  
Airway Scope ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Intubation Success Rate ◽  
Glidescope Video Laryngoscope

Objectives. Early airway management is very important for severely ill patients. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of face to face intubation in four different types of laryngoscopes (Macintosh laryngoscope, Pentax airway scope (AWS), Glidescope video laryngoscope (GVL), and C-MAC video laryngoscope (C-MAC)).Method. Ninety-five nurses and emergency medical technicians were trained to use the AWS, C-MAC, GVL and Macintosh laryngoscope with standard airway trainer manikin and face to face intubation. We compared VCET (vocal cord exposure time), tube pass time, 1st ventilation time, VCET to tube pass time, tube pass time to 1st ventilation time, and POGO (percentage of glottis opening) score. In addition, we compared success rate according to the number of attempts and complications.Result. VCET was similar among all laryngoscopes and POGO score was higher in AWS. AWS and Macintosh blade were faster than GVL and C-MAC in total intubation time. Face to face intubation success rate was lower in GVL than other laryngoscopes.Conclusion. AWS and Macintosh were favorable laryngoscopes in face to face intubation. GVL had disadvantage performing face to face intubation.

scholarly journals Macintosh laryngoscope and i-view™ and C-MAC® video laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box: a randomized crossover manikin study

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiyuki Nakanishi ◽  
Yoshiki Sento ◽  
Yuji Kamimura ◽  
Kazuya Sobue
Keyword(s):  
Tracheal Intubation ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
Care Experience ◽  
Manikin Study ◽  
Lehane Grade ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Difficulty Scale

Abstract Background We tested the hypothesis that the C-MAC® video laryngoscope (C-MAC) with an external display is more useful than the disposable i-view™ video laryngoscope (i-view) with an integrated display or a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box. Methods In this randomized, crossover manikin study, we recruited 37 medical personnel with > 2 years of dedicated anesthesia experience from five hospitals. After the three successful intubations within 60 s using each laryngoscope without a box, the participants performed tracheal intubation thrice with each laryngoscope with at least 2-h intervals in a determined order. The primary outcome was the intubation time. The secondary outcomes were success rate, Cormack-Lehane grade, and subjective difficulty scale score. Results Thirty-seven personnel (11 women and 26 men) with 12 [5–19] (median [interquartile range]) years of anesthesia and intensive care experience were enrolled. There was no significant difference in the intubation time: 30 [26–32] s for Macintosh, 29 [26–32] s for i-view, and 29 [25–31] s for C-MAC (P = 0.247). The success rate was 95–100%, without a significant difference (P = 0.135). The i-view and C-MAC exhibited superior Cormack-Lehane grades and lower subjective difficulty scale scores than the Macintosh; however, there were no differences between the i-view and C-MAC. Conclusions Rapid and highly successful tracheal intubation was possible with both Macintosh, i-view, and C-MAC on a normal airway manikin in an aerosol box. Improved Cormack-Lehane grade and the ease of performing the procedure may support the use of video laryngoscopes. Trial registration UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000040269. Registered 30 April 2020.

scholarly journals Analysis of tracheal intubation in out-of-hospital helicopter emergency medicine recorded by video laryngoscopy

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Knapp ◽  
Bettina Eberle ◽  
Michael Bernhard ◽  
Lorenz Theiler ◽  
Urs Pietsch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Quality Control ◽  
Tracheal Intubation ◽  
Airway Management ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Solar Irradiation ◽  
Video Laryngoscopy ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Intubation Success

Abstract Background Tracheal intubation remains the gold standard of airway management in emergency medicine and maximizing safety, intubation success, and especially first-pass intubation success (FPS) in these situations is imperative. Methods We conducted a prospective observational study on all 12 helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) bases of the Swiss Air Rescue, between February 15, 2018, and February 14, 2019. All 428 patients on whom out-of-hospital advanced airway management was performed by the HEMS crew were included. The C-MAC video laryngoscope was used as the primary device for tracheal intubation. Intubation procedures were recorded by the video laryngoscope and precise time points were recorded to verify the time necessary for each attempt and the overall procedure time until successful intubation. The videos were further analysed for problems and complications during airway management by an independent reviewer. Additionally, a questionnaire about the intubation procedure, basic characteristics of the patient, circumstances, environmental factors, and the provider’s level of experience in airway management was filled out. Main outcome measures were FPS of tracheal intubation, overall success rate, overall intubation time, problems and complications of video laryngoscopy. Results FPS rate was 87.6% and overall success rate 98.6%. Success rates, overall time to intubation, and subjective difficulty were not associated to the providers’ expertise in airway management. In patients undergoing CPR FPS was 84.8%, in trauma patients 86.4% and in non-trauma patients 93.3%. FPS in patients with difficult airway characteristics, facial trauma/burns or obesity ranges between 87 and 89%. Performing airway management indoors or inside an ambulance resulted in a significantly higher FPS of 91.1% compared to outdoor locations (p < 0.001). Direct solar irradiation on the screen, fogging of the lens, and blood on the camera significantly impaired FPS. Several issues for further improvements in the use of video laryngoscopy in the out-of-hospital setting and for quality control in airway management were identified. Conclusion Airway management using the C-MAC video laryngoscope with Macintosh blade in a group of operators with mixed experience showed high FPS and overall rates of intubation success. Video recording emergency intubations may improve education and quality control.

scholarly journals McGrath Video Laryngoscope May Take a Longer Intubation Time Than Macintosh Laryngoscope

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Prerana N. Shah ◽  
Kaveri Das
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Study ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Total Duration ◽  
Video Laryngoscope ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
Laryngoscopic View ◽  
Lehane Grade ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade Ii ◽  
Grade Iii

Background. Video laryngoscopes provide better view and can improve ease of intubation compared with standard laryngoscopes. Methods. A prospective randomized study was done on 60 patients, 18 to 65 years old, comparing McGrath video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope. The aim was to compare the ease, efficacy, and usability of them during routine airway management. The primary endpoint was duration of intubation and the secondary endpoints were Cormack and Lehane grade of laryngoscopic view, number of intubation attempts, and incidence of complications. Results. There was an increase in total duration of intubation with McGrath video laryngoscope with 42.9 ± 19.5 seconds compared to Macintosh laryngoscope with 17.9 ± 4.6 seconds. In Macintosh group, 73.3% had grade I, 20% had grade II, and 6.7% had grade III Cormack Lehane view, while in McGrath group, 83.3% had grade I, 13.3% had grade II, and 3.3% had grade III. In McGrath group, 6 patients (20%) required more than 120 seconds to get intubated and only 73.3% were intubated in 1 attempt, while patients in Macintosh group had 100% successful intubation in 1 attempt. Pharyngeal trauma was seen with McGrath videolaryngoscopy. Conclusion. Duration of laryngoscopy, intubation, and total duration of intubation were significantly higher in McGrath group than in Macintosh group. McGrath group required a higher number of intubation attempts.

scholarly journals Comparison of Direct and Indirect Laryngoscopes in Vomitus and Hematemesis Settings: A Randomized Simulation Trial

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryosuke Mihara ◽  
Nobuyasu Komasawa ◽  
Sayuri Matsunami ◽  
Toshiaki Minami
Keyword(s):  
Tracheal Intubation ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
Direct Laryngoscope ◽  
Mcgrath Mac ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Intubation Success ◽  
Intubation Success Rate

Background.Videolaryngoscopes may not be useful in the presence of hematemesis or vomitus. We compared the utility of the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL), which is a direct laryngoscope, with that of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope (AWS) and McGRATH MAC (McGRATH), which are videolaryngoscopes, in simulated hematemesis and vomitus settings.Methods.Seventeen anesthesiologists with more than 1 year of experience performed tracheal intubation on an adult manikin using McL, AWS, and McGRATH under normal, hematemesis, and vomitus simulations.Results.In the normal setting, the intubation success rate was 100% for all three laryngoscopes. In the hematemesis settings, the intubation success rate differed significantly among the three laryngoscopes (P=0.021). In the vomitus settings, all participants succeeded in tracheal intubation with McL or McGRATH, while five failed in the AWS trial with significant difference (P=0.003). The intubation time did not significantly differ in normal settings, while it was significantly longer in the AWS trial compared to McL or McGRATH trial in the hematemesis or vomitus settings (P<0.001, compared to McL or McGRATH in both settings).Conclusion.The performance of McGRATH and McL can be superior to that of AWS for tracheal intubation in vomitus and hematemesis settings in adults.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document