Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Am J Emerg Med. 2015 May;33(5):691-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.03.006. Epub 2015 Mar 12.

Performance of intubation with 4 different airway devices by unskilled rescuers: manikin study.

Author information

1
Department of Emergency Medicine, Samsung Changwon Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Changwon, Republic of Korea.
2
Department of Emergency Medicine, Inje University, Busan Paik Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea.
3
Department of Emergency Medicine, Kangwon National University Hospital, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea.
4
Department of Emergency Medicine, Bundang Jesaeng General Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

This study was designed to compare the performances of 4 airway devices in achieving successful ventilation.

METHODS:

A randomized crossover trial was conducted to evaluate 4 airway devices: laryngeal mask airway (LMA), i-gel (iGEL), PENTAX Airway Scope (AWS), and Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL). Thirty-eight unskilled rescuers performed intubation on a manikin during chest compressions in normal and difficult airway scenarios. The time to ventilation, intubation success rate, and difficulty of intubation were measured.

RESULTS:

The time to ventilation of the airway devices in the normal scenario had a median value of 8.8 seconds (interquartile range, 7.3-10.5 seconds) for iGEL, 16.1 seconds (13.9-19.3 seconds) for LMA, 30.6 seconds (24.6-37.6 seconds) for AWS, and 35.0 seconds (29.5-45.9 seconds) for MCL. In the difficult airway scenario, the respective time to ventilation was 8.6 seconds (7.8-10.0 seconds), 15.3 seconds (14.3-20.2 seconds), 29.4 seconds (25.7-36.3 seconds) and 59.0 seconds (46.1-103.3 seconds). The success rates were 100% and 100% for LMA, 100% and 100% for iGEL, 97.4% and 94.7% for AWS, and 78.9% and 47.4% for MCL in the normal and difficult airway scenarios. The difficulties of intubation expressed as numerical rating scale were 2.0 and 2.0 (median values) for LMA, 1.0 and 2.0 for iGEL, 3.0 and 3.0 for AWS, and 4.0 and 5.0 for MCL in the normal and difficult airway scenarios, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

With novice intubators who were unfamiliar with the airway devices, the LMA, iGEL, and AWS were superior to the MCL for establishing an airway without interruption of chest compressions in a manikin study. Intubation with the iGEL was faster and easier than with the other airway devices.

PMID:
25800412
DOI:
10.1016/j.ajem.2015.03.006
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center