Thomas Cloke,Catherine Ross,Paula Joy,Anthony Carver,Thomas E Potter,Dani Padman,Kate Kanga,Imran Ahmad,Kariem El-Boghdadly,Fiona E Kelly,Timothy M Cook
{"title":"A two-person verbal check to confirm tracheal intubation: evaluation of practice changes to prevent unrecognised oesophageal intubation.","authors":"Thomas Cloke,Catherine Ross,Paula Joy,Anthony Carver,Thomas E Potter,Dani Padman,Kate Kanga,Imran Ahmad,Kariem El-Boghdadly,Fiona E Kelly,Timothy M Cook","doi":"10.1016/j.bja.2024.09.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nDeaths from unrecognised oesophageal intubation continue despite national campaigns emphasising the importance of capnography to confirm tracheal intubation. A two-person verbal intubation check is recommended in consensus guidelines intended to prevent such deaths. This check can be performed by the intubator with their assistant, either as a one-step process (identification of sustained exhaled carbon dioxide) or as a two-step process (adding identification of the tracheal tube passing through the vocal cords during videolaryngoscopy).\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nIn two hospitals we introduced two-person checking of tracheal intubation. In one hospital this involved the one-step process and in the other the two-step process. We used anonymous online questionnaires before, during, and after these changes to collect opinions from anaesthetists and their assistants regarding the feasibility and acceptability of these changes.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nMost intubators (116/149, 78%) and intubators' assistants (70/72, 97%) reported that the two-person verbal intubation check would reduce the likelihood of unrecognised oesophageal intubation. Benefits and lack of negative aspects were reported for both one-step and two-step two-person intubation checks in both centres. Intubators judged that the checks improved communication and teamwork (118/149, 79%); intubators' assistants reported feeling more empowered to voice concerns if needed (69/72, 96%), a flattened team hierarchy (53/72, 74%), and feeling more valued as team members (64/72, 89%). Most intubators (122/149, 82%) and intubators' assistants (68/72, 94%) planned to continue using the two-person intubation check for all future intubations.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nOur results suggest that a two-person verbal intubation check is feasible and acceptable to all members of the intubating team.","PeriodicalId":9250,"journal":{"name":"British journal of anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2024.09.006","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Deaths from unrecognised oesophageal intubation continue despite national campaigns emphasising the importance of capnography to confirm tracheal intubation. A two-person verbal intubation check is recommended in consensus guidelines intended to prevent such deaths. This check can be performed by the intubator with their assistant, either as a one-step process (identification of sustained exhaled carbon dioxide) or as a two-step process (adding identification of the tracheal tube passing through the vocal cords during videolaryngoscopy).
METHODS
In two hospitals we introduced two-person checking of tracheal intubation. In one hospital this involved the one-step process and in the other the two-step process. We used anonymous online questionnaires before, during, and after these changes to collect opinions from anaesthetists and their assistants regarding the feasibility and acceptability of these changes.
RESULTS
Most intubators (116/149, 78%) and intubators' assistants (70/72, 97%) reported that the two-person verbal intubation check would reduce the likelihood of unrecognised oesophageal intubation. Benefits and lack of negative aspects were reported for both one-step and two-step two-person intubation checks in both centres. Intubators judged that the checks improved communication and teamwork (118/149, 79%); intubators' assistants reported feeling more empowered to voice concerns if needed (69/72, 96%), a flattened team hierarchy (53/72, 74%), and feeling more valued as team members (64/72, 89%). Most intubators (122/149, 82%) and intubators' assistants (68/72, 94%) planned to continue using the two-person intubation check for all future intubations.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest that a two-person verbal intubation check is feasible and acceptable to all members of the intubating team.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) is a prestigious publication that covers a wide range of topics in anaesthesia, critical care medicine, pain medicine, and perioperative medicine. It aims to disseminate high-impact original research, spanning fundamental, translational, and clinical sciences, as well as clinical practice, technology, education, and training. Additionally, the journal features review articles, notable case reports, correspondence, and special articles that appeal to a broader audience.
The BJA is proudly associated with The Royal College of Anaesthetists, The College of Anaesthesiologists of Ireland, and The Hong Kong College of Anaesthesiologists. This partnership provides members of these esteemed institutions with access to not only the BJA but also its sister publication, BJA Education. It is essential to note that both journals maintain their editorial independence.
Overall, the BJA offers a diverse and comprehensive platform for anaesthetists, critical care physicians, pain specialists, and perioperative medicine practitioners to contribute and stay updated with the latest advancements in their respective fields.