...
首页> 外文期刊>Canadian journal of anesthesia: Journal canadien d'anesthesie >Tracheal intubation during chest compressions using Pentax-AWS((R)), GlideScope ((R)), and Macintosh laryngoscope: a randomized crossover trial using a mannequin.
【24h】

Tracheal intubation during chest compressions using Pentax-AWS((R)), GlideScope ((R)), and Macintosh laryngoscope: a randomized crossover trial using a mannequin.

机译:使用Pentax-AWS(R),GlideScope(R)和Macintosh喉镜进行胸部按压期间的气管插管:使用人体模型进行的随机交叉试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: A randomized crossover trial was conducted to compare the performance of two videolaryngoscopes (Pentax-AWS((R)), GlideScope((R))) with the Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation during continuous chest compressions on a mannequin. METHODS: Thirty-two inexperienced junior interns performed tracheal intubations on an advanced life support simulator with either a normal or difficult airway scenario. The sequence of intubating devices and airway difficulty were randomized. The following data were measured and recorded: time to complete tracheal intubation (primary end point), overall success rate, time to visualize the vocal cords, percentage of glottic opening, dental compression, and ease of intubation. RESULTS: With a normal airway, the times (median [interquartile range]) to complete tracheal intubation were shorter with the Pentax-AWS (12.1 [10.1-14.4] sec) and the GlideScope (14.3 [12.4-17.6] sec) than with the Macintosh laryngoscope (16.5 [13.1-22.1] sec) (P < 0.03 for both). The time difference between the two videolaryngoscopes was not statistically significant. With a difficult airway scenario, the times to complete tracheal intubation were 13.9 [10.9-20.4] sec, 19.2 [16.4-32.3] sec, and 30.1 [21.0-56.5] sec, respectively (P < 0.05 for all differences). The videolaryngoscopes were also more effective than the Macintosh laryngoscope with respect to secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The two videolaryngoscopes were superior to the Macintosh laryngoscope in terms of performing tracheal intubation during continuous chest compressions on a mannequin. In a difficult airway scenario simulating cardiac arrest, the Pentax-AWS performed better than the GlideScope.
机译:背景:进行了一项随机交叉试验,以比较两台视频喉镜(Pentax-AWS(R),GlideScope(R))与Macintosh喉镜在连续对人体模型进行胸部按压时进行气管插管的性能。方法:32名缺乏经验的初中实习生在具有正常或困难气道情况的高级生命支持模拟器上进行气管插管。插管设备的顺序和气道困难情况是随机的。测量并记录以下数据:完成气管插管的时间(主要终点),总成功率,可视化声带的时间,声门张开的百分比,牙齿压迫和插管的难易程度。结果:对于正常的气道,使用Pentax-AWS(12.1 [10.1-14.4] sec)和GlideScope(14.3 [12.4-17.6] sec)完成气管插管的时间(中位[四分位间距])要短于Macintosh喉镜(16.5 [13.1-22.1]秒)(两者均P <0.03)。两个电子喉镜之间的时差在统计学上不显着。在困难的气道情况下,完成气管插管的时间分别为13.9 [10.9-20.4]秒,19.2 [16.4-32.3]秒和30.1 [21.0-56.5]秒(所有差异均P <0.05)。就次级结局而言,电子喉镜也比Macintosh喉镜更有效。结论:在对人体模型进行连续胸部按压期间进行气管插管方面,两个电子喉镜优于Macintosh喉镜。在模拟心脏骤停的困难气道情况下,Pentax-AWS的性能优于GlideScope。

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