Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparing first pass success of Channeled versus Non-channeled KingVision video laryngoscopes in patients presenting to the emergency department – A randomized control study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparing first pass success of Channeled versus Non-channeled KingVision video laryngoscopes in patients presenting to the emergency department – A randomized control study
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparing first pass success of Channeled versus Non-channeled KingVision video laryngoscopes in patients presenting to the emergency department – A randomized control study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparing first pass success of Channeled versus Non-channeled KingVision video laryngoscopes in patients presenting to the emergency department – A randomized control study
2025
Overview
In modern times, the emergency physician (EP) has access to a host of video laryngoscopes (VL). There are different makes, models, angulations in the blades provided by different VLs. The blades may be channeled or non-channeled. In busy emergency departments (ED), ease and speed of intubations in managing the emergent airways may impact the outcome for the patient.
The primary objective of our study was to compare the rates of first pass success using the channeled versus the non-channeled blades of the KingVision VL (KVVL).
This was a randomized controlled single blinded study. All patients requiring emergent definitive airway management were included in the study. They were randomized into 2 groups – channeled and non-channeled KVVL. Intubations were carried out accordingly. First pass success, time taken to intubate and crossover between the blades were recorded.
A total of 130 patients were enrolled in the study. First pass success for the channeled and non-channeled KVVL was 55.4 % and 81.6 % (p = 0.005) respectively. The mean time to intubate using the channeled and non-channeled KVVL were 24.69 s [95 % CI 20.25–29.13] and 28.95 s [95 % CI 23.64–34.26] (p = 0.207) respectively. A total of 33.07 % patients had crossovers between the blades.
We found the non-channeled blades to have a significantly higher percentage of first pass success. Performance with respect to time to intubate was similar between the two. We recommend using the non-channeled KVVL for intubations in the EDs.
Publisher
Elsevier Inc,Elsevier Limited
Subject
