http://hdl.handle.net/10379/1292 2017-10-29T23:44:35Z http://hdl.handle.net/10379/1327 Comparison of the Airtraq® and Truview® laryngoscopes to the Macintosh laryngoscope for use by Advanced Paramedics in easy and simulated difficult intubation in manikins Nasim, Sajid; Butt, Ihsan; Malik, Muhammad A.; O' Donnell, John; Higgins, Brendan D.; Harte, Brian H.; Laffey, John G. Background Paramedics are frequently required to perform tracheal intubation, a potentially life-saving manoeuvre in severely ill patients, in the prehospital setting. However, direct laryngoscopy is often more difficult in this environment, and failed tracheal intubation constitutes an important cause of morbidity. Novel indirect laryngoscopes, such as the Airtraq® and Truview® laryngoscopes may reduce this risk. Methods We compared the efficacy of these devices to the Macintosh laryngoscope when used by 21 Paramedics proficient in direct laryngoscopy, in a randomized, controlled, manikin study. Following brief didactic instruction with the Airtraq® and Truview® laryngoscopes, each participant took turns performing laryngoscopy and intubation with each device, in an easy intubation scenario and following placement of a hard cervical collar, in a SimMan® manikin. Results The Airtraq® reduced the number of optimization manoeuvres and reduced the potential for dental trauma when compared to the Macintosh, in both the normal and simulated difficult intubation scenarios. In contrast, the Truview® increased the duration of intubation attempts, and required a greater number of optimization manoeuvres, compared to both the Macintosh and Airtraq® devices. Conclusion The Airtraq® laryngoscope performed more favourably than the Macintosh and Truview® devices when used by Paramedics in this manikin study. Further studies are required to extend these findings to the clinical setting. 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10379/1326 Comparison of the Glidescope® and Pentax AWS® laryngoscopes to the Macintosh laryngoscope for use by Advanced Paramedics in easy and simulated difficult intubation Nasim, Sajid; Maharaj, Chrisen H.; Malik, Muhammad A.; O' Donnell, John; Higgins, Brendan D.; Laffey, John G. Background Intubation of the trachea in the pre-hospital setting may be lifesaving in severely ill and injured patients. However, tracheal intubation is frequently difficult to perform in this challenging environment, is associated with a lower success rate, and failed tracheal intubation constitutes an important cause of morbidity. Novel indirect laryngoscopes, such as the Glidescope® and the AWS® laryngoscopes may reduce this risk. Methods We compared the efficacy of these devices to the Macintosh laryngoscope when used by 25 Advanced Paramedics proficient in direct laryngoscopy, in a randomized, controlled, manikin study. Following brief didactic instruction with the Glidescope® and the AWS® laryngoscopes, each participant took turns performing laryngoscopy and intubation with each device, in an easy intubation scenario and following placement of a hard cervical collar, in a SimMan® manikin. Results Both the Glidescope® and the AWS® performed better than the Macintosh, and demonstrate considerable promise in this context. The AWS® had the least number of dental compressions in all three scenarios, and in the cervical spine immobilization scenario it required fewer maneuvers to optimize the view of the glottis. Conclusion The Glidescope® and AWS® devices possess advantages over the conventional Macintosh laryngoscope when used by Advanced Paramedics in normal and simulated difficult intubation scenarios in this manikin study. Further studies are required to extend these findings to the clinical setting. 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z