Skip to content

King Video Laryngoscope Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Prehospital Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

King Video Laryngoscope Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Prehospital Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02208349
Enrollment
83
Registered
2014-08-05
Start date
2014-04-30
Completion date
2017-04-30
Last updated
2018-06-06

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

Conditions

Respiratory Failure

Keywords

intubation, laryngoscopy, prehospital, emergency medical services

Brief summary

The goal of this study is to compare the first pass success rate of intubation between video assisted intubation and traditional direct visualization intubation in the field by Emergency Medical Service (EMS) professionals

Detailed description

We will equip several local advanced life support ambulances with a low cost video laryngoscope for a total of 12 months. We will outfit ½ of the ambulance crews with the King Video Laryngoscope (KVL) for 6 months while the other ½ of the ambulances will use traditional direct laryngoscopy (DL). After 6 months, the groups will switch devices. We will randomly assign those ambulances that first use the KVL. After one year (12 months) we will compare the outcomes between the two methods including first pass intubation success, total success rate for intubation, and complications (need for surgical airway, rescue device, need to revert from KVL to DL, etc.). Please see the attached protocol page for additional details.

Interventions

DEVICEKing Video Laryngoscope

We will outfit ½ of the ambulance crews with the King Video Laryngoscope (KVL) for 6 months while the other ½ of the ambulances will use traditional direct laryngoscopy (DL). After 6 months, the groups will switch devices. We will randomly assign those ambulances that first use the KVL. After one year (12 months) we will compare the outcomes between the two methods.

DEVICEtraditional direct laryngoscopy (DL)

Sponsors

Saint Vincent Hospital, Pennsylvania
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 120 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* all patients \>= age 18 year of age undergoing ETI in the prehospital setting

Exclusion criteria

* age \< 18 years of age

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Successful First Intubation Attempt (First Pass Attempt)less than 24 hours, collected for the duration of the study (approximately 34 months)Endotracheal Intubation (ETI) attempt will be defined as tip of the laryngoscope blade passing the patient's lips. First attempt success rate will be defined as the number of successful placements occurring on the first attempt to place the endotracheal tube.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Overall Successup to 24 hours, duration of the study (approximately 34 months)Overall success rate will be defined as the total number of successful placements divided by the total number of patients treated.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

83 were enrolled and 82 met inclusion criteria.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Video Laryngoscopy Treatment
Patients treated by ambulance agency with video laryngoscopy.
40
Direct Laryngoscopy Treatment
Patients treated by ambulance agency with direct laryngoscopy.
42
Total82

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicVideo Laryngoscopy TreatmentDirect Laryngoscopy TreatmentTotal
Age, Customized
Age 18-59
11 Participants13 Participants24 Participants
Age, Customized
Age 60 and over
29 Participants29 Participants58 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
12 Participants9 Participants21 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
28 Participants33 Participants61 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 400 / 42
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 400 / 42

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants With Successful First Intubation Attempt (First Pass Attempt)

Endotracheal Intubation (ETI) attempt will be defined as tip of the laryngoscope blade passing the patient's lips. First attempt success rate will be defined as the number of successful placements occurring on the first attempt to place the endotracheal tube.

Time frame: less than 24 hours, collected for the duration of the study (approximately 34 months)

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Video LaryngoscopyNumber of Participants With Successful First Intubation Attempt (First Pass Attempt)25 Participants
Direct LaryngoscopyNumber of Participants With Successful First Intubation Attempt (First Pass Attempt)28 Participants
Secondary

Overall Success

Overall success rate will be defined as the total number of successful placements divided by the total number of patients treated.

Time frame: up to 24 hours, duration of the study (approximately 34 months)

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Video LaryngoscopyOverall Success29 Participants
Direct LaryngoscopyOverall Success34 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026