Masui. The Japanese journal of anesthesiology · 2014
[Comparative study of the KingVision videolaryngoscope and Airwayscope using manikins].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Hayashi Kentaro, Shimada Nobuhiro, Shiba Juntaro, Niwa Yasunori, Takeuchi Mamoru
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: KingVision (KV) is a new videolaryngoscope. In this study, we compared the ease of use of the KV with the Airwayscope (AWS) by experienced personnel in a simulated manikin.
METHODS: Twenty-eight anesthesiologists participated in this study. We used an advanced patient simulator (AIRSIM) to simulate normal manikin and difficult airway scenarios including cervical spine rigidity and limited mouth opening. We compared the time required for visualization of the glottis (Tv) and tracheal intubation (Ti), and analyzed the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score and the success rates for tracheal intubation.
RESULTS: In normal manikin, the Tv and Ti with the KV were significantly shorter than with the AWS (P < 0.05). The POGO score with the KV was higher than with the AWS (P < 0.05). In difficult airway scenarios including both cervical spine rigidity and limited mouth opening, the Tv and Ti with the KV were shorter than with only the AWS (P < 0.05). There is not much difference between KV and AWS regarding the POGO score in difficult airway.
CONCLUSIONS: KV may be a suitable device for routine anesthesia care and difficult airway intubation. Further studies in a clinical setting are necessary to confirm these findings.
METHODS: Twenty-eight anesthesiologists participated in this study. We used an advanced patient simulator (AIRSIM) to simulate normal manikin and difficult airway scenarios including cervical spine rigidity and limited mouth opening. We compared the time required for visualization of the glottis (Tv) and tracheal intubation (Ti), and analyzed the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score and the success rates for tracheal intubation.
RESULTS: In normal manikin, the Tv and Ti with the KV were significantly shorter than with the AWS (P < 0.05). The POGO score with the KV was higher than with the AWS (P < 0.05). In difficult airway scenarios including both cervical spine rigidity and limited mouth opening, the Tv and Ti with the KV were shorter than with only the AWS (P < 0.05). There is not much difference between KV and AWS regarding the POGO score in difficult airway.
CONCLUSIONS: KV may be a suitable device for routine anesthesia care and difficult airway intubation. Further studies in a clinical setting are necessary to confirm these findings.