首页> 外文期刊>Prehospital emergency care >Comparison of success rates between two video laryngoscope systems used in a prehospital clinical trial
【24h】

Comparison of success rates between two video laryngoscope systems used in a prehospital clinical trial

机译:院前临床试验中使用的两种视频喉镜系统的成功率比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives. The primary aims of this study were to compare paramedic success rates and complications of two different video laryngoscopes in a prehospital clinical study. Methods. This study was a multi-agency, prospective, non-randomized, cross over clinical trial involving paramedics from four different EMS agencies. Following completion of training sessions, six Storz CMAC? video laryngoscopes and six King Vision? (KV) video laryngoscopes were divided between agencies and placed into service for 6 months. Paramedics were instructed to use the video laryngoscope for all patients estimated to be ≥ 18 years old who required advanced airway management per standard operating procedure. After 6 months, the devices were crossed over for the final 6 months of the study period. Data collection was completed using a telephone data collection system with a member of the research team (available 24/7). First attempt success, overall success, and success by attempt, were compared between treatment groups using exact logistic regression adjusted for call type and user experience. Results. Over a 12-month period, 107 patients (66 CMAC, 41 KV) were treated with a study device. The CMAC had a significantly higher likelihood of first attempt success (OR = 1.85; 95% CI 0.74, 4.62; p = 0.188), overall success (OR = 7.37; 95% CI 1.73, 11.1; p = 0.002), and success by attempt (OR = 3.38; 95% CI 1.67, 6.8; p = 0.007) compared to KV. Providers reverted to direct laryngoscopy in 80% (27/34) of the video laryngoscope failure cases, with the remaining patients having their airways successfully managed with a supraglottic airway in 3 cases and bag-valve mask in 4 cases. The provider-reported complications were similar and none were statistically different between treatment groups. Complication rates were not statistically different between devices. Conclusion. The CMAC had a higher likelihood of successful intubation compared to the King Vision. Complication rates were not statistically different between groups. Video laryngoscope placement success rates were not higher than our historical direct laryngoscopy success rates.
机译:目标。这项研究的主要目的是在院前临床研究中比较两种不同视频喉镜的护理人员成功率和并发症。方法。这项研究是一项涉及来自四个不同EMS机构的护理人员的多机构,前瞻性,非随机,交叉临床试验。完成培训课程后,有六个Storz CMAC?电子喉镜和六景视觉? (KV)视频喉镜在各机构之间划分,并投入使用六个月。指导医护人员对所有估计≥18岁的患者使用视频喉镜,这些患者需要按照标准操作程序进行高级气道管理。 6个月后,在研究期的最后6个月内将设备交叉使用。数据收集是通过电话数据收集系统与研究团队的一名成员完成的(24/7可用)。使用针对呼叫类型和用户体验进行了调整的精确logistic回归,比较了治疗组之间的首次尝试成功,总体成功和尝试成功。结果。在12个月的时间内,用研究设备治疗了107例患者(66 CMAC,41 KV)。 CMAC首次尝试成功的可能性(OR = 1.85; 95%CI 0.74,4.62; p = 0.188),总体成功(OR = 7.37; 95%CI 1.73,11.1; p = 0.002)和通过尝试(OR = 3.38; 95%CI 1.67,6.8; p = 0.007)。在80%(27/34)的视频喉镜衰竭病例中,提供者恢复了直接喉镜检查,其余患者的气道成功通过声门上气道成功处理3例,而袋气门面罩成功治愈4例。提供者报告的并发症相似,治疗组之间无统计学差异。设备之间的并发症发生率无统计学差异。结论。与King Vision相比,CMAC成功插管的可能性更高。两组之间的并发症发生率无统计学差异。视频喉镜放置成功率不高于我们历史上直接喉镜的成功率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号