Article Data

  • Views 3066
  • Dowloads 146

Original Research

Open Access

A prospective randomized high fidelity simulation center based side-by-side comparison analyzing the success and ease of conventional versus new generation video laryngoscope technology by inexperienced laryngoscopists

  • THOMAS C. WASS1
  • ADAM K. JACOB2
  • SANDRA L. KOPP2
  • LAURENCE C. TORSHER2

1,Mayo Clinic

2Department of Anesthesiology College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic

DOI: 10.22514/SV62.102011.5 Vol.6,Issue 2,October 2011 pp.36-45

Published: 31 October 2011

*Corresponding Author(s): THOMAS C. WASS E-mail: wass.thomas@mayo.edu

Abstract

Introduction.  Indirect video laryngoscopes are altering the landscape of airway management. The primary aim of this prospec-tive randomized patient simulator analysis was to objectively compare video laryngoscopes to standard airway management techniques in novice users.

Methods. "First year medical students were exposed to high-fidelity simulated normal and difficult airway scenarios while using an array of indirect video laryngoscopes (e.g., the GlideScope, McGRATH or Pentax AWS-100) that were compared to Macin-tosh laryngoscope and fiberoptic bronchoscope (i.e., historic gold standards for normal and difficult airways, respectively)." Results. In the normal airway scenario, the best glottic view (both subjective and objective) was obtained with the video laryngoscopes and intubation success rates were highest with the video laryngoscopes (100% success rate for each device) and Macintosh (80%). In the difficult airway scenario, the best glottic view was achieved with all video laryngoscopes and the fiberoptic bronchoscope; however, tracheal intubation was best achieved with the video laryngoscopes (100% success rate for each device) whereas the success rate with the bronchoscope was only 36%.

Discussion. Our findings support the use of the GlideScope, McGRATH, or Macintosh laryngoscopes for novice users mana-ging a normal airway. When managing the difficult airway, there was no difference between any video or Macintosh laryngosco-pe in the time to successfully intubate the trachea. Over time, study participants demonstrated learned behavior as they became more facile with all devices. When comparing the video laryngoscopes, all three performed similarly overall and proved useful in the hands of novice users. Regardless of airway difficulty, the fiberoptic bronchoscope yielded the worst results.

Keywords

airway, airway manage-ment, airway equipment, patient simu-lation, success, tracheal intubation

Cite and Share

THOMAS C. WASS,ADAM K. JACOB,SANDRA L. KOPP,LAURENCE C. TORSHER. A prospective randomized high fidelity simulation center based side-by-side comparison analyzing the success and ease of conventional versus new generation video laryngoscope technology by inexperienced laryngoscopists. Signa Vitae. 2011. 6(2);36-45.

References

1. Nouruzi-Sedeh P, Schumann M, Groeben H. Laryngoscopy via Macintosh blade versus GlideScope: success rate and time for endotra-cheal intubation in untrained medical personnel. Anesthesiology 2009;110:32-7.

2. Timmermann A, Russo SG, Crozier TA, Eich C, Mundt B, Albrecht B, et al. Novices ventilate and intubate quicker and safer via intubating laryngeal mask than by conventional bag-mask ventilation and laryngoscopy. Anesthesiology 2007;107:570-6.

3. Konrad C, Schupfer G, Wietlisbach M, Gerber H. Learning manual skills in anesthesiology: Is there a recommended number of cases for anesthetic procedures? Anesth Analg 1998;86:635-9.

4. Mulcaster JT, Mills J, Hung OR, MacQuarrie K, Law A, Pytka S, et al. Laryngoscopic intubation: learning and performance. Anesthesiology 2003;98:23-7.

5. Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984;39:1105-11.

6. Mallampati SR, Gatt SP, Gugino LD, Desai SP, Waraksa B, Freiberger D, et al. A clinical sign to predict difficult tracheal intubation: a pros-pective study. Can Anaesth Soc J 1985;32:429-34.

7. Flores AS, Garber SM, Niesen AD, Long TR, Lynch JJ, Wass CT. Clinical application of a novel video camera laryngoscope: a case series venturing beyond the normal airway. J Clin Anesth 2010;22:201-4.

8. Narang AT, Oldeg PF, Medzon R, Mahmood AR, Spector JA, Robinett DA. Comparison of intubation success of video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in the difficult airway using high-fidelity simulation. Simul Healthc 2009;4:160-5.

9. O’Leary AM, Sandison MR, Myneni N, Cirilla DJ, Roberts KW, Deane GD. Preliminary evaluation of a novel videolaryngoscope, the McGrath series 5, in the management of difficult and challenging endotracheal intubation. J Clin Anesth 2008;20:320-1.

10. Shippey B, Ray D, McKeown D. Case series: the McGrath videolaryngoscope--an initial clinical evaluation. Can J Anaesth 2007;54:307-13.

11. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology 2003;98:1269-77.

12. Connelly NR, Ghandour K, Robbins L, Dunn S, Gibson C. Management of unexpected difficult airway at a teaching institution over a 7-year period. J Clin Anesth 2006;18:198-204.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) (On Hold)

Chemical Abstracts Service Source Index

Scopus: CiteScore 1.3 (2024)

Embase

Submission Turnaround Time

Top