Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Direct vs. Video-Laryngoscopy for Intubation by Paramedics of Simulated COVID-19 Patients under Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Crossover Trial.


ABSTRACT: A safe way of securing the airway with an endotracheal tube is one of the priorities of an advanced cardiovascular life support algorithm for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study was to compare intubation success rates (ISR) and intubation time (IT) of different laryngoscopes for simulated COVID-19 patients under cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, crossover trial. Fifty four active paramedics performed endotracheal intubation with a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (MAC) and McGrath videolaryngoscope (McGrath) with and without personal protective equipment (PPE). Without PPE, ISRs were 87% and 98% for MAC and McGrath, respectively (p = 0.32). ITs were 22.5 s (IQR: 19-26) and 19.5 s (IQR: 17-21) for MAC and McGrath, respectively (p = 0.005). With PPE, first-pass ISR were 30% and 89% with MAC and McGrath, respectively (p < 0.001). The overall success rates were 83% vs. 100% (p = 0.002). Median ITs were 34.0 s (IQR: 29.5-38.5) and 24.8 s (IQR: 21-29) for MAC and McGrath, respectively (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the McGrath videolaryngoscope appears to possess significant advantages over the Macintosh direct laryngoscope when used by paramedics in suspected or confirmed COVID-19 intubation scenarios.

SUBMITTER: Gadek L 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8707195 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC8497912 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6089856 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC8658072 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6475241 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9270833 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6480652 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6513507 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5203695 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6472630 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7060522 | biostudies-literature