Title of article :
Comparison of Different Intubation Methods in Difficult Airways during Simulated Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation with Continuous Chest Compression: A Randomized Cross-Over Manikin Trial
Author/Authors :
Evrin, Togay Department of Emergency Medicine - Ufuk University Medical Faculty - Dr Ridvan Ege Education and Research Hospital - 06520 Cankaya - Ankara, Turkey , Smereka, Jacek Department of Emergency Medical Service - Wroclaw Medical University - Parkowa 34 - Wroclaw, Poland , Gorczyca, Damian Medical Simulation Center - Lazarski University - Swieradowska 43 - 02-662 Warsaw - Poland , Bialka, Szymon Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care - Medical University of Silesia - 3-go Maja 13-15 - 41-800 Zabrze - Poland , Robert Ladny, Jerzy Department of Emergency Medicine and Disaster - Medical University Bialystok - Szpitalna 37, 15-295 Bialystok - Poland , Katipoglu, Burak Department of Emergency Medicine - Ufuk University Medical Faculty - Dr Ridvan Ege Education and Research Hospital - 06520 Cankaya - Ankara, Turkey , Szarpak, Lukasz Medical Simulation Center - Lazarski University - Swieradowska 43 - 02-662 Warsaw - Poland
Abstract :
Introduction. Airway management is one of key elements of resuscitation. Endotracheal intubation is still considered the gold standard for airway management during resuscitation. Aim. The aim of the study was to compare success rates and intubation time of diferent endotracheal intubation methods during emergency intubation with difcult airways in the conditions of
cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a standardized manikin model. Methods. The study was designed as a prospective, randomized,
cross-over simulation study. It involved 46 paramedics with at least 5 years of experience in Emergency Medical Service.
Te participants performed endotracheal intubation under difcult airway conditions during continuous chest compression,
implemented with the LUCAS3 chest compression system. Tree methods of tracheal intubation were applied: (1) standard
Macintosh laryngoscope without a bougie stylet; (2) standard laryngoscope and a standard bougie stylet; (3) standard laryngoscope
and a new bougie stylet. Results. Te overall intubation success rate was 100% in the standard bougie and new bougie groups and
lower (86.9%) when no bougie stylet was used (P=0.028). Te intubation success rate with the 1st attempt equalled 91.3% for the
new bougie group, 73.9% for standard bougie, and only 23.9% in the no-bougie group. Te median intubation time was shortest
in the new bougie group, where it amounted to 29 s (interquartile range [IQR]: 25–38); the time equalled 38s (IQR:31–44.5) in
the standard bougie group and 47.5s (IQR:36–58) in the no-bougie group. Te ease of use was lowest in the no-bougie group (85,
IQR:63–88), average in the standard bougie group (44, IQR:30–51), and highest in the new bougie stylet group (32, IQR:19–41).
Conclusion. In this manikin-based study, paramedics were able to perform endotracheal intubation with higher efcacy and in a shorter time using the new bougie stylet as compared with the standard bougie stylet.
Keywords :
Comparison , Intubation Methods , Simulated Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Chest Compression , Manikin Trial , LUCAS3
Journal title :
Emergency Medicine International