The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025
Comparative Efficacy of Face-to-Face and Right-Rear Upright Intubation in a Randomized Crossover Manikin Study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tseng Cheng-Wei, Wen Chung-Shiung, Yu Sheng-Han, Su Yung-Cheng, Li Shu-Sheng, Chen Hsin-Ling, Hung Tzu-Yao
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Upright intubation is essential for managing difficult airways but can be challenging, especially for less experienced clinicians. Face-to-face intubation may lower first-pass success rates due to unfamiliar orientation. New videolaryngoscope devices have the potential to improve intubation success. We aimed to compare first-pass success rates, intubation duration, and glottic view between the right-rear and face-to-face approaches, using channeled videolaryngoscope, hyperangulated videolaryngoscope, and video stylet for upright intubation.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-over manikin simulation study involving 30 participants-19 attending physicians, six residents, and five nurse practitioners-to compare the efficacy of these devices to a standard Macintosh videolaryngoscope, using both right-rear and face-to-face approaches.
RESULTS: We used Cox regression analysis to calculate hazard ratios for the following variables: first-pass success rate; intubation time; glottic view quality (Cormack-Lehane grade [C-L]); and percentage of glottis opening score (POGO]. The right-rear approach demonstrated a substantial improvement in first-pass success rates compared to face-to-face, with rates of 93% vs 78% and a hazard ratio of 2.10 (95% confidence interval 1.58-2.80). Additionally, both the video stylet and channeled videolaryngoscope techniques further optimized first-pass success rates and enhanced glottic visualization, achieving a CL grade I view and POGO scores of 100%, even in the inverted face-to-face orientation. These devices outperformed the standard Macintosh and hyperangulated videolaryngoscopes.
CONCLUSION: The right-rear approach was associated with higher first-pass success rates and provided a more familiar orientation for operators during upright intubation. Video stylets and channeled videolaryngoscopes also contributed to improved success rates, shorter intubation times, and better glottic visualization.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-over manikin simulation study involving 30 participants-19 attending physicians, six residents, and five nurse practitioners-to compare the efficacy of these devices to a standard Macintosh videolaryngoscope, using both right-rear and face-to-face approaches.
RESULTS: We used Cox regression analysis to calculate hazard ratios for the following variables: first-pass success rate; intubation time; glottic view quality (Cormack-Lehane grade [C-L]); and percentage of glottis opening score (POGO]. The right-rear approach demonstrated a substantial improvement in first-pass success rates compared to face-to-face, with rates of 93% vs 78% and a hazard ratio of 2.10 (95% confidence interval 1.58-2.80). Additionally, both the video stylet and channeled videolaryngoscope techniques further optimized first-pass success rates and enhanced glottic visualization, achieving a CL grade I view and POGO scores of 100%, even in the inverted face-to-face orientation. These devices outperformed the standard Macintosh and hyperangulated videolaryngoscopes.
CONCLUSION: The right-rear approach was associated with higher first-pass success rates and provided a more familiar orientation for operators during upright intubation. Video stylets and channeled videolaryngoscopes also contributed to improved success rates, shorter intubation times, and better glottic visualization.