Skip to content

The Tulip GT airway versus Guedel with facemask airway

The Tulip GT airway versus Guedel with facemask airway: a randomised crossover clinical study using inexperienced users in anaesthetised patients

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN11759551
Enrollment
120
Registered
2015-04-13
Start date
2014-04-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2017-09-04

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

Conditions

Airway management in the community and by para-medical staff is widely accepted as poor. Good airway management is fundamental to a safe outcome. Respiratory Airway management

Interventions

Two different airway devices are being tested. The most common in use is the facemask. A new device (Tulip airway) works better in manikins. Ventilation parameters are measured using both devices in u

Sponsors

North West London Hospitals NHS Trust
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: All users must have had BLS training within the last year. All patients must be 18-70 years old, ASA 1 or 2, scheduled surgery with no risk factors for regurgitation.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Risk of regurgitation 2. Vomiting 3. ASA status greater than 2

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Parameters measured are tidal volume, peak inspiratory pressure, end-tidal carbon dioxide. Three breaths are recorded. After anaesthesia is induced in the patient, the depth of anaesthesia is deepened until the patient has total jaw relaxation. The consultant anaesthetist doing the study confirms that the airway is manageable and that the patient can be ventilated and ventilates the patient 3 times and measures the ventilatory parameters of tidal volume, airway pressure and end tidal carbon dioxide. The inexperienced user then ventilates the patient using both devices in a randomised order. The first 3 breaths that are achieved with each device are measured using the same end-points as the consultant. The inexperienced user is given 60 seconds to achieve ventilation. The study is abandoned if there is patient compromise. The exact time points are 3 breaths within 60 seconds oaf attempting ventilation.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Ease of use and airway preference by the inexperienced user is assessed.

Countries

United Kingdom

Contacts

Public ContactPeter Neville Robinson
pnrfmt@msn.com+44 (0)7770224064

Outcome results

None listed

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