Selective intubation with endotracheal tube introducer in difficult airway: A randomized, prospective, cross-over study.

IF 1.1 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2021-10-29 eCollection Date: 2021-10-01 DOI:10.4103/2452-2473.329632
Hakan Özerol, Emre Şancı, Onur Karakayalı, Erdem Aydın, Hüseyin Cahit Halhallı
{"title":"Selective intubation with endotracheal tube introducer in difficult airway: A randomized, prospective, cross-over study.","authors":"Hakan Özerol,&nbsp;Emre Şancı,&nbsp;Onur Karakayalı,&nbsp;Erdem Aydın,&nbsp;Hüseyin Cahit Halhallı","doi":"10.4103/2452-2473.329632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Selective lung intubation is a life-saving procedure in emergency departments. While various equipment can be used in selective lung intubation, most of this equipment is not readily available; therefore, single-lumen endotracheal intubations are performed for rapid interventions.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study was designed as a randomized, prospective, cross-over study using the 90° rotation technique for selective intubation on a manikin model with and without endotracheal tube introducer (ETI) in difficult airway settings. Forty-six emergency physicians were included in the study. The primary outcome was evaluating time to selective intubations, and secondary outcomes were first and second attempt success rates and the self-perceived difficulty level of each method according to the participants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean time to the first successful endotracheal intubation was significantly longer for both right selective and left selective intubations with ETI utilization than without ([39.71 ± 9.83 vs. 21.86 ± 5.94 s], [<i>P</i> < 0.001]), ([42.2 ± 10.81 vs. 26.23 ± 7.97 s], [<i>P</i> < 0.001], respectively). The first-pass success rate did not differ for right selective intubation with or without an ETI (45/46 [97.8%] and 45/46 [97.8%], respectively). However, the first-pass success rate for left selective intubation was significantly higher with ETI as compared to without an ETI (30/46 [65.2%] and 13/46 [28.3%], respectively) (<i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While the success rates of right selective intubation were the same, the left selective intubation success rates with ETI are higher than the styletted endotracheal tube, which can be strong evidence for this method's applicability in practice. Expanding the use of ETI and increasing the experience of the practitioners can contribute to further success.</p>","PeriodicalId":46536,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"21 4","pages":"205-209"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c1/85/TJEM-21-205.PMC8593425.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2452-2473.329632","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Selective lung intubation is a life-saving procedure in emergency departments. While various equipment can be used in selective lung intubation, most of this equipment is not readily available; therefore, single-lumen endotracheal intubations are performed for rapid interventions.

Materials and methods: This study was designed as a randomized, prospective, cross-over study using the 90° rotation technique for selective intubation on a manikin model with and without endotracheal tube introducer (ETI) in difficult airway settings. Forty-six emergency physicians were included in the study. The primary outcome was evaluating time to selective intubations, and secondary outcomes were first and second attempt success rates and the self-perceived difficulty level of each method according to the participants.

Results: The mean time to the first successful endotracheal intubation was significantly longer for both right selective and left selective intubations with ETI utilization than without ([39.71 ± 9.83 vs. 21.86 ± 5.94 s], [P < 0.001]), ([42.2 ± 10.81 vs. 26.23 ± 7.97 s], [P < 0.001], respectively). The first-pass success rate did not differ for right selective intubation with or without an ETI (45/46 [97.8%] and 45/46 [97.8%], respectively). However, the first-pass success rate for left selective intubation was significantly higher with ETI as compared to without an ETI (30/46 [65.2%] and 13/46 [28.3%], respectively) (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: While the success rates of right selective intubation were the same, the left selective intubation success rates with ETI are higher than the styletted endotracheal tube, which can be strong evidence for this method's applicability in practice. Expanding the use of ETI and increasing the experience of the practitioners can contribute to further success.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
困难气道气管内导管引入器选择性插管:一项随机、前瞻性、交叉研究。
背景:选择性肺插管是急诊科抢救生命的一种方法。虽然各种设备可用于选择性肺插管,但大多数设备并不容易获得;因此,采用单腔气管插管进行快速干预。材料和方法:本研究设计为一项随机、前瞻性、交叉研究,在困难气道环境下,使用90°旋转技术对有或无气管内导管引入器(ETI)的人体模型进行选择性插管。46名急诊医生参与了这项研究。主要结果是评估选择性插管的时间,次要结果是参与者的第一次和第二次尝试成功率以及每种方法的自我感知难度水平。结果:使用ETI的右选择性气管插管和左选择性气管插管首次插管成功的平均时间均明显高于未使用ETI的患者([39.71±9.83∶21.86±5.94 s], [P < 0.001])和([42.2±10.81∶26.23±7.97 s], [P < 0.001])。有或没有ETI的右侧选择性插管的一次通过成功率无差异(分别为45/46[97.8%]和45/46[97.8%])。然而,与没有ETI相比,有ETI的左选择性插管的首次通过成功率显著高于无ETI(分别为30/46[65.2%]和13/46 [28.3%])(P < 0.001)。结论:在右侧选择性插管成功率相同的情况下,ETI左侧选择性插管成功率高于气管插管样式,这有力地证明了该方法在实践中的适用性。扩大ETI的使用和增加从业者的经验可以有助于进一步的成功。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine (Turk J Emerg Med) is an International, peer-reviewed, open-access journal that publishes clinical and experimental trials, case reports, invited reviews, case images, letters to the Editor, and interesting research conducted in all fields of Emergency Medicine. The Journal is the official scientific publication of the Emergency Medicine Association of Turkey (EMAT) and is printed four times a year, in January, April, July and October. The language of the journal is English. The Journal is based on independent and unbiased double-blinded peer-reviewed principles. Only unpublished papers that are not under review for publication elsewhere can be submitted. The authors are responsible for the scientific content of the material to be published. The Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine reserves the right to request any research materials on which the paper is based. The Editorial Board of the Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine and the Publisher adheres to the principles of the International Council of Medical Journal Editors, the World Association of Medical Editors, the Council of Science Editors, the Committee on Publication Ethics, the US National Library of Medicine, the US Office of Research Integrity, the European Association of Science Editors, and the International Society of Managing and Technical Editors.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of factors affecting the success of non invasive mechanical ventilation in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema in the emergency department. High-risk electrocardiogram presentations in the acute coronary syndrome patient - Beyond ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Improved outcome prediction in acute pancreatitis with generated data and advanced machine learning algorithms. Local envenomation by green pit viper complicated with airway obstruction. Comparison of different surfaces in resuscitation quality using a real-time feedback device: A manikin study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1