Ear, Nose and Throat Anaesthesia
Conditions
Interventions
Direct Laryngoscope group
Sponsors
Orotta College of Medicne and Health Sciences
Ministry of Health Research policy and HRD department
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Patients from the age group >18 Elective patients under general anesthesia , patients ASA classification of I and II patients who have agreed to participate on the study
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: patients who were intubated before arrival to operation theatre, those who were hemodynamic instability, upper respiratory tract infection and known history of difficult intubation. patients who declined to participate in the study.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The overall findings observed Video laryngoscope proven to have less time of intubation,and fewer esophageal intubations in comparison to direct laryngoscope. However, first attempt success rate, Cormack Lehane grade, drug type, ease of intubation, haemodynamic status were found to be statistically insignificant. Over all these finding demonstrate the efficacy and superiority of Video laryngoscope . | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The secondary outcomes can be explained by the secondary effect of the provided interventions. Besides the primary outcome, they also have a secondary outcome on the patient conditions such as post- operative throat pain. The incidence of post-operative throat pain under direct laryngoscope (47.9%) was significantly greater (P=0.001) than video laryngoscope (14.6%). | — |
Countries
Eritrea
Contacts
Public ContactYonatan Andemeskel
college lecturer and reserch coordinator
Outcome results
None listed