首页> 外文期刊>Anesthesiology >Laryngoscopy via Macintosh blade versus GlideScope: success rate and time for endotracheal intubation in untrained medical personnel.
【24h】

Laryngoscopy via Macintosh blade versus GlideScope: success rate and time for endotracheal intubation in untrained medical personnel.

机译:通过Macintosh刀片进行喉镜检查与GlideScope对比:未经培训的医务人员进行气管插管的成功率和时间。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BACKGROUND: Tracheal intubation is the preferred technique to secure the airway and apply mechanical ventilation. However, when performed by untrained medical personnel, tracheal intubation via direct laryngoscopy has a high rate of failure. The GlideScope (Verathon Medical Europe, Ijsselstein, Netherlands) technique improves the success rate for difficult tracheal intubation performed by experienced physicians; whether this technique improves the success rate for normal intubations when performed by inexperienced personnel as well is unknown. Therefore, the authors compared the success rate of direct laryngoscopy versus the GlideScope technique performed by personnel inexperienced in tracheal intubations. METHODS: Twenty volunteers, who had had only manikin training for tracheal intubation, attempted 5 intubations with either technique in patients scheduled for general anesthesia within a time limit of 120 s. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were divided into 2 groups for intubation via direct laryngoscopy (n = 100) or the GlideScope technique (n = 100). Between groups, there was neither a clinically relevant difference in the anthropometric data nor in the medication used for anesthesia. The overall success rate was 93% for the GlideScope technique versus 51% for direct laryngoscopy (P < 0.01). Time for intubation was 89 +/- 35 s for direct laryngoscopy versus 63 +/- 30 s for GlideScope technique (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Tracheal intubation is the preferred technique to secure the airways in patients with a high risk of aspiration and is important in emergency medicine. Direct laryngoscopy with the Macintosh blade has a success rate of only 51% in our subjects. Using the GlideScope technique, a success rate of more than 90% within 120 s can be achieved after the first attempt, even in personnel untrained in intubation.
机译:背景:气管插管是固定气道和应用机械通气的首选技术。但是,当由未经培训的医务人员进行时,通过直接喉镜进行气管插管的失败率很高。 GlideScope(Verathon Medical Europe,Ijsselstein,Netherlands)技术可提高经验丰富的医师完成困难气管插管的成功率;由经验不足的人员进行这项技术是否还能提高正常插管的成功率还不得而知。因此,作者比较了直接喉镜检查与GlideScope技术的成功率,这些技术是由气管插管经验不足的人员进行的。方法:20名仅接受过人体模型气管插管训练的志愿者在计划的120 s内对采用全麻术的患者尝试了5种插管方法。结果:将200例患者分为两组,分别通过直接喉镜检查(n = 100)或GlideScope技术(n = 100)进行插管。在各组之间,人体测量数据和麻醉用药均无临床相关差异。 GlideScope技术的总成功率为93%,而直接喉镜检查的总成功率为51%(P <0.01)。直接喉镜检查的插管时间为89 +/- 35 s,而GlideScope技术的插管时间为63 +/- 30 s(P <0.01)。结论:气管插管是确保有高抽吸危险的患者气道安全的首选技术,在急诊医学中很重要。在我们的受试者中,使用Macintosh刀片进行的直接喉镜检查成功率仅为51%。使用GlideScope技术,即使在未经插管培训的人员中,首次尝试后,在120秒内的成功率也可以达到90%以上。

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