Sniff to see. Comparing sniffing position versus simple head extension position for glottic exposure - A prospective, randomized cross over study

N. Sahay, Devi P Samaddar, A. Chatterjee, Anubha Sahay, Shashi Kant, A. Ranjan
{"title":"Sniff to see. Comparing sniffing position versus simple head extension position for glottic exposure - A prospective, randomized cross over study","authors":"N. Sahay, Devi P Samaddar, A. Chatterjee, Anubha Sahay, Shashi Kant, A. Ranjan","doi":"10.4103/2468-6360.186503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Traditional teaching dictates that direct laryngoscopy is best performed with the patient′s head in the sniffing position. However, of late, many authors have challenged this concept. In a recent meta-analysis, based on studies involving 2759 participants researchers have found that sniffing position affords no added advantage over simple head extension. Our study highlights an important scientific fact overlooked in all previously done studies on the subject. Aim: We aimed to compare sniffing position and simple head extension position for ease of laryngoscopic intubation using an interval scale. Materials and Methods: A prospective single-blind crossover study of 200 patients, where glottic exposure in both positions was compared in the same patient using Cormack-Lehane (CL) grading and percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score. Intubation difficulty was compared using the intubation difficulty score. Results: In every study, CL grading, an ordinal scale, has been used for comparison of glottic exposure. In our set of patients, CL grading showed ′no change′ in glottic exposure quality in 85% of the laryngoscopies. When we used POGO system of classification which is an interval scale, for the same laryngoscopies in the same patients, sniffing position improved exposure in 106 patients, whereas simple head extension position improved exposure in 76 patients. Only 18 patients showed no glottic exposure. Statistical Analysis: Two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney) test and Chi-square tests showed sniffing position to be significantly better position for glottic exposure and for ease of intubation. Conclusion: Sniffing position provides better glottis exposure and it is easier to intubate a patient in the sniffing position as compared to simple head extension position. Sniffing position should therefore be used as initial position when attempting intubation.","PeriodicalId":31033,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Specialties","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Specialties","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2468-6360.186503","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Traditional teaching dictates that direct laryngoscopy is best performed with the patient′s head in the sniffing position. However, of late, many authors have challenged this concept. In a recent meta-analysis, based on studies involving 2759 participants researchers have found that sniffing position affords no added advantage over simple head extension. Our study highlights an important scientific fact overlooked in all previously done studies on the subject. Aim: We aimed to compare sniffing position and simple head extension position for ease of laryngoscopic intubation using an interval scale. Materials and Methods: A prospective single-blind crossover study of 200 patients, where glottic exposure in both positions was compared in the same patient using Cormack-Lehane (CL) grading and percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score. Intubation difficulty was compared using the intubation difficulty score. Results: In every study, CL grading, an ordinal scale, has been used for comparison of glottic exposure. In our set of patients, CL grading showed ′no change′ in glottic exposure quality in 85% of the laryngoscopies. When we used POGO system of classification which is an interval scale, for the same laryngoscopies in the same patients, sniffing position improved exposure in 106 patients, whereas simple head extension position improved exposure in 76 patients. Only 18 patients showed no glottic exposure. Statistical Analysis: Two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney) test and Chi-square tests showed sniffing position to be significantly better position for glottic exposure and for ease of intubation. Conclusion: Sniffing position provides better glottis exposure and it is easier to intubate a patient in the sniffing position as compared to simple head extension position. Sniffing position should therefore be used as initial position when attempting intubation.
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
闻一闻看。比较嗅探体位与单纯头伸体位对声门暴露的影响——一项前瞻性、随机交叉研究
背景:传统的教学规定,直接喉镜检查是最好的病人的头在嗅位进行。然而,最近,许多作者对这一概念提出了挑战。在最近的一项荟萃分析中,基于对2759名参与者的研究,研究人员发现,与简单的头部伸展相比,吸气姿势并没有额外的优势。我们的研究强调了一个重要的科学事实,在之前所有关于这个主题的研究中都被忽视了。目的:我们的目的是比较吸气体位和简单的头部伸展体位对喉镜插管的易用性使用间隔量表。材料和方法:一项纳入200例患者的前瞻性单盲交叉研究,使用Cormack-Lehane (CL)分级和声门打开百分比(POGO)评分比较同一患者两种体位的声门暴露。采用插管困难评分比较插管困难程度。结果:在每项研究中,CL分级,一个序数量表,已被用于比较声门暴露。在我们的患者组中,CL分级显示85%的喉镜检查中声门暴露质量“无变化”。当我们使用POGO分类系统时,这是一种间隔量表,对于同一患者的同一喉镜检查,嗅位改善了106例患者的暴露,而简单的头部伸展位改善了76例患者的暴露。只有18例患者没有声门暴露。统计分析:双样本Wilcoxon秩和(Mann-Whitney)检验和卡方检验显示,嗅探体位对声门暴露和插管的便便性明显更好。结论:与单纯的头伸位相比,嗅探位可以更好地暴露声门,并且更容易插管。因此,尝试插管时应使用嗅位作为初始体位。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Co-Morbidities in psoriatic versus non-psoriatic patients Stability testing of extemporaneous preparation of methyl salicylate ointment An investigation of the saudi healthcare system's readiness for change in the light of vision 2030: The role of transformational leadership style Attitudes and perceptions towards organ donation in Riyadh A rare case of suicide attempt by subcutaneous self-injection of kerosene: A case report and review of literature
×
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