Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
Out-of-hospital tracheal intubation with single-use versus reusable metal laryngoscope blades: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Jabre, Patricia Galinski, Michel Ricard-Hibon, Agnès Devaud, Marie Laure Ruscev, Mirko Kulstad, Erik Vicaut, Éric Adnet, Frédéric Margenet, Alain Marty, Jean Combes, Xavier |
| Copyright Year | 2011 |
| Abstract | STUDY OBJECTIVE Emergency tracheal intubation is reported to be more difficult with single-use plastic than with reusable metal laryngoscope blades in both inhospital and out-of-hospital settings. Single-use metal blades have been developed but have not been compared with conventional metal blades. This controlled trial compares the efficacy and safety of single-use metal blades with reusable metal blades in out-of-hospital emergency tracheal intubation. METHODS This randomized controlled trial was carried out in France with out-of-hospital emergency medical units (Services de Médecine d'Urgence et de Réanimation). This was a multicenter prospective noninferiority randomized controlled trial in adult out-of-hospital patients requiring emergency tracheal intubation. Patients were randomly assigned to either single-use or reusable metal laryngoscope blades and intubated by a senior physician or a nurse anesthetist. The primary outcome was first-pass intubation success. Secondary outcomes were incidence of difficult intubation, need for alternate airway devices, and early intubation-related complications (esophageal intubation, mainstem intubation, vomiting, pulmonary aspiration, dental trauma, bronchospasm or laryngospasm, ventricular tachycardia, arterial desaturation, hypotension, or cardiac arrest). RESULTS The study included 817 patients, including 409 intubated with single-use blades and 408 with a reusable blade. First-pass intubation success was similar in both groups: 292 (71.4%) for single-use blades, 290 (71.1%) for reusable blades. The 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in treatments (0.3%; 95% CI -5.9% to 6.5%) did not include the prespecified inferiority margin of -7%. There was no difference in rate of difficult intubation (difference 3%; 95% CI -7% to 2%), need for alternate airway (difference 4%; 95% CI -8% to 1%), or early complication rate (difference 3%; 95% CI -3% to 8%). CONCLUSION First-pass out-of-hospital tracheal intubation success with single-use metal laryngoscopy blades was noninferior to first-pass success with reusable metal laryngoscope blades. |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.10.011 |
| PubMed reference number | 21129822 |
| Journal | Medline |
| Volume Number | 57 |
| Issue Number | 3 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | http://www.cardiomobile.ch/articles/aem_singleuse_11.pdf |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.10.011 |
| Journal | Annals of emergency medicine |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
