A paramedic study comparing the use of the Airtraq ® , Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscopes in simulated prehospital airway scenarios*

Citations Over TimeTop 11% of 2010 papers

Abstract

In a randomised, cross-over study, we compared the use of the Airtraq , Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscopes by paramedics for tracheal intubation in three simulated prehospital scenarios. Fifty-four paramedics were invited to take part. When evaluated in a difficult airway manikin, median IQR [range] time to intubation with the Airtraq (21 (16-37 [6-80] s) and Airway Scope (16 (5-75 [12-23] s) was shorter than that with the Macintosh laryngoscope (39 (25-54 [7-120] s; p < 0.0001). The success rate within 30 s was greater with the Airtraq (61%) and Airway Scope (93%) than with the Macintosh laryngoscope (22%; p < 0.0001). When used for a standard intubation and in the sitting position, we found minimal differences among the three laryngoscopes. We conclude that the Airway Scope and Airtraq have significant advantages over the Macintosh laryngoscope and that of the two, the Airway Scope is the more effective device to use in the prehospital environment.

Related Papers

• → Retention of tracheal intubation skills by novice personnel: a comparison of the Airtraq ® and Macintosh laryngoscopes*(2007)79 cited
• → Randomized controlled trial of the A.P. Advance, McGrath, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in normal and difficult intubation scenarios: a manikin study(2011)31 cited
• → Determination of the utility of the Intubation Difficulty Scale for use with indirect laryngoscopes(2011)22 cited
• → Comparison of results from novice and trained personnel using the Macintosh laryngoscope, Pentax AWS(R), C-MAC(TM) and Bonfils intubation fibrescope: a manikin study(2013)16 cited
• → Randomized trial of success of pediatric anesthesiologists learning to use two video laryngoscopes(2012)15 cited