Dataset Information

Teaching Endotracheal Intubation Using a Cadaver Versus a Manikin-based Model: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:The optimal method to train novice learners to perform endotracheal intubation (ETI) is unknown. The study objective was to compare two models: unembalmed cadaver vs simulation manikin. METHODS:Fourth-year medical students, stratified by baseline ETI experience, were randomized 1:1 to train on a cadaver or simulation manikin. Students were tested and video recorded on a separate cadaver; two reviewers, blinded to the intervention, assessed the videos. Primary outcome was time to successful ETI, analyzed with a Cox proportional hazards model. Authors also compared percentage of glottic opening (POGO), number of ETI attempts, learner confidence, and satisfaction. RESULTS:Of 97 students randomized, 78 were included in the final analysis. Median time to ETI did not differ significantly (hazard ratio [HR] 1.1; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.7-1.8): cadaver group = 34.5 seconds (interquartile ratio [IQR]: 23.3-55.8) vs manikin group = 35.5 seconds (IQR: 23.8-80.5), with no difference in first-pass success (odds ratio [OR] = 1; 95% CI, 0.1-7.5) or median POGO: 80% cadaver vs 90% manikin (95% CI, -14-34%). Satisfaction was higher for cadavers (median difference = 0.5; p = 0.002; 95% CI, 0-1) as was change in student confidence (median difference = 0.5; p = 0.03; 95% CI, 0-1). Students rating their confidence a 5 ("extremely confident") demonstrated decreased time to ETI (HR = 4.2; 95% CI, 1.0-17.2). CONCLUSION:Manikin and cadaver training models for ETI produced similar time to ETI, POGO, and first-pass success. Cadaver training was associated with increased student satisfaction and confidence; subjects with the highest confidence level demonstrated decreased time to ETI.

SUBMITTER: Pedigo R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6948684 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Teaching Endotracheal Intubation Using a Cadaver Versus a Manikin-based Model: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Pedigo Ryan R Tolles Juliana J Watcha Daena D Kaji Amy H AH Lewis Roger J RJ Stark Elena E Jordan Jaime J

The western journal of emergency medicine 20191209 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>The optimal method to train novice learners to perform endotracheal intubation (ETI) is unknown. The study objective was to compare two models: unembalmed cadaver vs simulation manikin.<h4>Methods</h4>Fourth-year medical students, stratified by baseline ETI experience, were randomized 1:1 to train on a cadaver or simulation manikin. Students were tested and video recorded on a separate cadaver; two reviewers, blinded to the intervention, assessed the videos. Primary outcome ...[more]

PMID: 31913829

Similar Datasets

Project description:Airway management is a crucial skill essential to paramedics and personnel working in Emergency Medical Services and Emergency Departments: Lack of practice, a difficult airway, or a trauma situation may limit the ability of paramedics to perform direct laryngoscopy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Videoscope devices are alternatives for airway management in these situations. The ETView VivaSight SL (ETView; ETView Ltd., Misgav, Israel) is a new, single-lumen airway tube with an integrated high-resolution imaging camera. To assess if the ETView VivaSight SL can be a superior alternative to a standard endotracheal tube for intubation in an adult cadaver model, both during and without simulated CPR.ETView VivaSight SL tube was investigated via an interventional, randomized, crossover, cadaver study. A total of 52 paramedics participated in the intubation of human cadavers in three different scenarios: a normal airway at rest without concomitant chest compression (CC) (scenario A), a normal airway with uninterrupted CC (scenario B) and manual in-line stabilization (scenario C). Time and rate of success for intubation, the glottic view scale, and ease-of-use of ETView vs. sETT intubation were assessed for each emergency scenario.The median time to intubation using ETView vs. sETT was compared for each of the aforementioned scenarios. For scenario A, time to first ventilation was achieved fastest for ETView, 19.5 [IQR, 16.5-22] sec, when compared to that of sETT at 21.5 [IQR, 20-25] sec (p?=?.013). In scenario B, the time for intubation using ETView was 21 [IQR, 18.5-24.5] sec (p?<?.001) and sETT was 27 [IQR, 24.5-31.5] sec. Time to first ventilation for scenario C was 23.5 [IQR, 19-25.5] sec for the ETView and 42.5 [IQR, 35-49.5] sec for sETT.In normal airways and situations with continuous chest compressions, the success rate for intubation of cadavers and the time to ventilation were improved with the ETView. The time to glottis view, tube insertion, and cuff block were all found to be shorter with the ETView.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02733536.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The obstetric airway is a significant cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. Endotracheal intubation is considered the standard of care but the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has gained acceptance as a rescue airway and has been incorporated into the obstetric airway management guidelines. In this randomized controlled equivalence trial, we compared the Supreme LMA (SLMA) with endotracheal intubation (ETT) in managing the obstetric airway during cesarean section. METHODS:Parturients who underwent elective cesarean section under general anesthesia were randomized to receive either an SLMA or ETT as their airway device. Our primary outcome was first-attempt insertion success. Successful insertion was defined as adequate bilateral air entry with auscultation and the presence of end-tidal carbon dioxide on the capnogram. The first-attempt insertion success rate was compared using the Chi-Square test. Secondary outcomes included time-to-ventilation, seal pressure, ventilation/hemodynamic parameters, occurrence of clinical aspiration, fetal outcomes, and maternal side effects associated with the airway device. RESULTS:We recruited 920 parturients (460 SLMA, 460 ETT) who underwent elective cesarean section under general anesthesia. Patient characteristics were similar between the groups. First attempt success was similar (Odds Ratio--ORSLMA/ETT: 1.00 (95%CI: 0.25, 4.02), p?=?1.0000). SLMA was associated with reduced time to effective ventilation (Mean Difference--MD -22.96; 95%CI: -?23.71, -?22.21?s) compared to ETT group (p?<? 0.0001). Ventilation parameters, maternal and fetal outcomes were similar between the groups, and there was no aspiration. CONCLUSIONS:SLMA could be an alternative airway management technique for a carefully selected low-risk obstetric population, with similar insertion success rates, reduced time to ventilation and less hemodynamic changes compared with ETT. Our findings are consistent with the airway guidelines in recommending the second-line use of LMA in the management of the obstetric airway. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The study was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov , identifier: NCT01858467 , retrospectively registered. Date of registration: May 21, 2013.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The benefits of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) as primary intervention in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) are still a matter in debate. Our objective was to compare HFNC therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in the prevention of endotracheal intubation in this group of patients. METHODS:An open-label, controlled and single-centre clinical trial was conducted in patients with severe AHRF, defined by a PaO2/FIO2 ratio ?200, to compare HFNC with a control group (CG) treated by COT delivered through a face mask, with the need to perform intubation as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes included tolerance of the HFNC device and to look for the predictive factors for intubation in these patients. RESULTS:A total of 46 patients were included (22 in the COT group and 24 in the HFNC group) 48% of whom needed intubation: 63% in the COT group and 33% in the HFNC group, with significant differences both in intention to treat [?2?=?4.2; p?=?0.04, relative risk (RR)?=?0.5; confidence interval (CI) 95%: 0.3-1.0] and also in treatment analysis (?2?=?4.7; p?=?0.03; RR?=?0.5; IC 95%: 0.3-0.9) We obtained a number needed to treat (NNT)?=?3 patients treated to avoid an intubation. Intubation occurred significantly later in the HFNC group. Estimated PaO2/FIO2, respiratory rate and dyspnea were significantly better in the HFNC group. Patients treated with HFNC who required intubation presented significant worsening after the first 8?h, as compared with non-intubated HFNC group patients. Mortality was 22% with no differences. The HFNC group patients were hospitalized for almost half of the time in the intensive care unit (ICU) and in the ward, with significantly less hospital length of stay. A total of 14 patients in the HFNC group (58%) complained of excessive heat and 17% of noise; 3 patients did not tolerate HFNC. CONCLUSION:Patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure who tolerate HFNC present a significantly lower need for endotracheal intubation compared with conventional oxygen therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTER:EUDRA CT number: 2012-001671-36The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Dataset Information

Teaching Endotracheal Intubation Using a Cadaver Versus a Manikin-based Model: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

Teaching Endotracheal Intubation Using a Cadaver Versus a Manikin-based Model: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure