FindTrial
Sign In

Comparison between video laryngoscope and conventional laryngoscope for ease of intubation

Comparative assessment of intubating conditions in adult patients using C-Mac video laryngoscope and Macintosh blade

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2021/03/031707
Enrollment
102
Registered
2021-03-04
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: O- Medical and Surgical

Interventions

Intervention1: nil: nil Intervention2: C-mac video laryngoscope: Comparing video laryngoscope to conventional Macintosh for better glottic view Also the time taken from scopy to intubation shall be co

Sponsors

Vijayanagara Institute of medical sciences
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1.American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status I to II 2.Modified Mallampati (Samsoon & Young) Airway class I and II

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1.American Society of Anaesthesiologiststs physical status 3 and 4 2.Patients with full stomach posyed for emergency surgeries 3.Patients with co-morbid conditions and known congenital anomalies. 4. Known or presumed difficult airways as per Modified Mallampati(Samsoon & Young)airway class 3 and 4 5.Refusal by the patient for the procedure.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Glottic view(by Modified Cormack Lehane grading)Timepoint: befrore and after intubation—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Intubation success rate Time for successful intubation Optimization manoeuvre Hemodynamic changesTimepoint: After intubation—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Devanand B

vijayanagar institute of medical sciences

dr.devanand.b@gmail.com9845233239

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026