Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin 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?
A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin study
Do you wish to request the book?
A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin 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
A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin study
2017
Overview
The efficacy of devices for difficult intubation in paediatric patients, especially with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view, has yet to be established. We compared intubating parameters among three devices (the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes).
This study is a randomised cross-over trial. Participants were 20 anaesthetists. Each device was tested three times using a paediatric manikin with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view. The order to use each device was randomised by a computer-generated random sequence. The primary endpoint was the rate of successful intubation. Secondary endpoints included the time taken to intubate, percentage of glottic opening score, and severity of potential dental trauma.
The successful intubation rates of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes were 100%, 72%, and 45%, respectively. The risk ratio of the success rates of Airtraq® compared with McGrath® and Macintosh laryngoscopes were 1.40 (95% CI; 1.19-1.64, P < 0.001) and 2.22 (95% CI; 1.68-2.94, P < 0.001), respectively. The modified Cormack-Lehane grade and percentage of the glottic opening score were better for the Airtraq® than for the other devices. The dental trauma score was lower for the Airtraq® than for the other devices. There were no significant differences in the intubation time among the groups.
The Airtraq® had higher success rate, had better visibility, and was associated with less dental trauma than the other devices in a difficult paediatric intubation model with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view.
Publisher
Public Library of Science,Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Subject
/ Child
/ Devices
/ Humans
/ Intubation, Intratracheal - adverse effects
/ Intubation, Intratracheal - instrumentation
/ Intubation, Intratracheal - methods
/ Laryngoscopes - adverse effects
/ Macintosh personal computers
/ Manikins
/ Medicine
/ Medicine and Health Sciences
/ Patients
/ Quality
/ Teeth
/ Trauma
