Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Ann Emerg Med. 1998 Oct;32(4):442-6.

Comparison of 2 cricothyrotomy techniques: standard method versus rapid 4-step technique.

Author information

1
Division of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Davis, Medical Center, Sacramento, USA. jfholmes@ucdavis.edu

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE:

To compare the success rate, complication rate and time required for the rapid 4-step technique versus the standard technique for cricothyrotomy.

METHODS:

We conducted a prospective, randomized crossover study. Twenty-seven emergency medicine interns, 1 junior medicine resident, and 4 senior medical students, without prior cricothyrotomy experience, were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group 1 was initially instructed in and then performed the standard technique; group 2 was initially instructed in and then performed the rapid 4-step technique. Each group was then instructed in and performed the alternate method. Cricothyrotomies were performed on preserved human cadavers.

RESULTS:

A surgical airway was established in 28 of 32 attempts with the use of the rapid 4-step technique (88%); the average time elapsed before tube placement was 43 seconds. Thirty of 32 attempts involving the standard technique (94%) were successful; the average time to tube placement was 134 seconds (95% confidence interval for a difference of 91 seconds, 63 to 119; P < .001). Complications were identified in 12 attempts involving the standard technique (38%; 1 considered major) and in 12 involving the rapid four-step technique (38%; 3 considered major). The incidence of major complications was 6% higher for the rapid 4-step technique (95% confidence interval, -9% to 21%).

CONCLUSION:

In a group of inexperienced subjects working on a preserved human cadaver model, the rapid 4-step technique for cricothyrotomy was performed in about one third the time required for performance of the standard technique. This finding was both clinically and statistically significant. Although the 2 techniques had similar success and complication rates, we noted a trend toward more severe complications in the rapid 4-step technique.

PMID:
9774928
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Support Center