None listed
Conditions
Brief summary
Airway or respiratory complication is one of leading causes of morbidity and mortality in anaesthesia. There are different techniques and intubating equipment (laryngoscope) available for anaesthetists to deal withdifficult airways. Anaesthetists use their knowledge and previous experience to decide which type of laryngoscope to use in these cases. In this study, we are evaluating, for the first time, this newly available videolaryngoscope. We are comparing it with the widely used Glidescope® video laryngoscope. The reason for comparing these two devices is because the blade design of both devices is similar. We hypothesise that In simulated difficult airways, the novel videolaryngoscope allows a faster tracheal intubation time as compared to the Glidescope® video laryngoscope. We will prospectively recruit 30 voluntary anaesthetic residents, registrars or consultants for this study. All participants will be tested on using each of the two intubation devices on a manikin with a simulated difficult airway. Participants will be assigned to one of the two groups – Group 1: novel videolaryngoscope followed by Glidescope® videolaryngoscope, or Group 2: Glidescope® videolaryngoscope followed by novel videolaryngoscope. The primary outcome is the time taken for successful tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes include: the number of failed intubation, the number of intubation attempts, the number and type of intubating adjuncts used, the best laryngoscopy view achieved and the ease of intubation.
Interventions
We will recruit 30 voluntary anaesthetic residents, registrars or consultants for this study. All participants will be tested on using each of the two intubation devices on a manikin with a simulated difficult airway. Participants will be assigned to one of the two groups – Group 1: novel videolaryngoscope followed by Glidescope® videolaryngoscope, or Group 2: Glidescope® videolaryngoscope followed by novel videolaryngoscope. The novel videolaryngoscope is similar to the glidescope in terms of b
We will recruit 30 voluntary anaesthetic residents, registrars or consultants for this study. All participants will be tested on using each of the two intubation devices on a manikin with a simulated difficult airway. Participants will be assigned to one of the two groups – Group 1: novel videolaryngoscope followed by Glidescope® videolaryngoscope, or Group 2: Glidescope® videolaryngoscope followed by novel videolaryngoscope. The novel videolaryngoscope is similar to the glidescope in terms of blade design. However, the screen and the technology connecting between the videocamera and the screen are different. The novel videolaryngoscope has not been tested before in mannikin or human. Each participant will receive standardized instruction for the use of each device as per the manufacturer’s guidelines before the commencement of the study. The difficult airway will be simulated using tongue swelling in the SimMan patient simulator (Laerdal Medical). The duration of the intervention will be about 5 minutes (time required to intubate the manikin). It will be a one-on-one face-to-face assessment between the observer and the participant. The participants will be using both the control device and the intervention device. There will not be any "wash out" period between the time when the control device is used and the time when the intervention device is used.
Sponsors
Royal Melbourne Hospital
Study design
Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Crossover
Primary purpose
Treatment
Masking
Open (masking not used)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
Anaesthetic residents, registrars or consultants who work at the Royal Melbourne Hospital.
Exclusion criteria
No exclusion criteria
Outcome results
None listed