Intubation
Conditions
Brief summary
The purpose of this study was to compare the four different intubation devices in 6 different scenarios.
Interventions
DEVICEThe Miller Laryngoscope
Direct laryngoscopy
Optical laryngoscopy
DEVICEThe GlideScope Ranger
Videolaryngoscopy
DEVICEThe Supraglottic Airway Laryngopharyngeal Tube (SALT)
Blind intubation
Sponsors
International Institute of Rescue Research and Education
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* give voluntary consent to participate in the study * minimum 1 year of work experience in emergency medicine * experienced emergency medical personnel (paramedics, nurses, physicians)
Exclusion criteria
* not meet the above criteria * wrist or low back diseases
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Time to intubation | 1 month | time from insertion of the blade to the first manual ventilation of the manikin´s lungs. If time of intubation is over than 60 seconds, attempt was recognized as failure. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Success of intubation | 1 month | effectiveness of the first, second and third intubation attempts and overall effectiveness of intubation by participants using four intubation devices. If the examinee failed at all attempts, the case was excluded from the time calculations. |
| POGO score | 1 month | self-reported percentage of glottis opening (POGO) score |
| VAS score | 1 month | participants were asked which method they would prefer in a real-life resuscitation. |
| Cormack-Lehane grading | 1 month | self-reported percentage the vocal cord visualization using the Cormack-Lehane grading (grade 1-4) |
Countries
Poland
Contacts
Primary ContactLukasz Szarpak
Outcome results
None listed