操作者对多个一次性支气管镜检查困难气道段能力的感知

G. Senyei, D. Nettlow, A. Husain, M. Nobari, R. Miller, G. Cheng
{"title":"操作者对多个一次性支气管镜检查困难气道段能力的感知","authors":"G. Senyei, D. Nettlow, A. Husain, M. Nobari, R. Miller, G. Cheng","doi":"10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2022.205.1_meetingabstracts.a4094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the prevalence of single-use bronchoscopes outside the operating room, where they had previously been employed primarily as intubation adjuncts. However, direct comparisons of the performance of these bronchoscopes has been limited. In this study, we describe our initial experience studying operator perception of how well multiple different bronchoscopes are able to engage difficult airway segments in an ex-vivo model. Methods: Nine faculty and fellows from the Pulmonary and Critical Care Division at UCSD were recruited to complete an airway survey of an ex-vivo model using three single use bronchoscopes (Olympus H-SteriScope, Ambu A-Scope 4, Verathon GlideScope B-Flex). This survey included engagement into traditionally difficult airway segments (RB1, RB6, LB1/2 and LB6) with and without a tool in the working channel. Immediately after completing these bronchoscopies, participants were directed to complete an anonymous survey rating each bronchoscopes ease of maneuverability into the difficult segments on a scale of 1-100 with a higher number representing a more favorable rating. The participant's ability to successfully engage each of these segments was also recorded. Results: Participants rated the ability to maneuver into difficult airway segments with a tool in the working channel by the Olympus singleuse bronchoscope (97.2 [94.3-100]) and Ambu single-use bronchoscope (84.7[74.2-95.2]) higher than the GlideScope single-use bronchoscope (49.3[36.3-64.3]) (Table 1). Additionally, a greater number of participants were able to successfully engage the selected difficult airway segments using the Olympus and Ambu single-use bronchoscopes both with and without a tool in the working channel when compared to the GlideScope single-use bronchoscope (Table 2 and Table 3). Conclusions: In this singlecenter study, the Olympus H-SteriScope and Ambu A-Scope 4 single-use bronchoscopes had a higher perceived maneuverability and were better able to engage difficult airway segments than the GlideScope B-Flex single-use bronchoscope. Further studies are needed to compare these single-use bronchoscopes to reusable bronchoscopes.","PeriodicalId":170670,"journal":{"name":"C40. INVESTIGATIONS IN INTERVENTIONAL PULMONOLOGY AND PLEURAL DISEASE","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Operator Perception of the Ability of Multiple Single-Use Bronchoscopes to Engage Difficult Airway Segments\",\"authors\":\"G. Senyei, D. Nettlow, A. Husain, M. Nobari, R. Miller, G. Cheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2022.205.1_meetingabstracts.a4094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the prevalence of single-use bronchoscopes outside the operating room, where they had previously been employed primarily as intubation adjuncts. However, direct comparisons of the performance of these bronchoscopes has been limited. In this study, we describe our initial experience studying operator perception of how well multiple different bronchoscopes are able to engage difficult airway segments in an ex-vivo model. Methods: Nine faculty and fellows from the Pulmonary and Critical Care Division at UCSD were recruited to complete an airway survey of an ex-vivo model using three single use bronchoscopes (Olympus H-SteriScope, Ambu A-Scope 4, Verathon GlideScope B-Flex). This survey included engagement into traditionally difficult airway segments (RB1, RB6, LB1/2 and LB6) with and without a tool in the working channel. Immediately after completing these bronchoscopies, participants were directed to complete an anonymous survey rating each bronchoscopes ease of maneuverability into the difficult segments on a scale of 1-100 with a higher number representing a more favorable rating. The participant's ability to successfully engage each of these segments was also recorded. Results: Participants rated the ability to maneuver into difficult airway segments with a tool in the working channel by the Olympus singleuse bronchoscope (97.2 [94.3-100]) and Ambu single-use bronchoscope (84.7[74.2-95.2]) higher than the GlideScope single-use bronchoscope (49.3[36.3-64.3]) (Table 1). Additionally, a greater number of participants were able to successfully engage the selected difficult airway segments using the Olympus and Ambu single-use bronchoscopes both with and without a tool in the working channel when compared to the GlideScope single-use bronchoscope (Table 2 and Table 3). Conclusions: In this singlecenter study, the Olympus H-SteriScope and Ambu A-Scope 4 single-use bronchoscopes had a higher perceived maneuverability and were better able to engage difficult airway segments than the GlideScope B-Flex single-use bronchoscope. Further studies are needed to compare these single-use bronchoscopes to reusable bronchoscopes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"C40. INVESTIGATIONS IN INTERVENTIONAL PULMONOLOGY AND PLEURAL DISEASE\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"C40. INVESTIGATIONS IN INTERVENTIONAL PULMONOLOGY AND PLEURAL DISEASE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2022.205.1_meetingabstracts.a4094\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"C40. INVESTIGATIONS IN INTERVENTIONAL PULMONOLOGY AND PLEURAL DISEASE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2022.205.1_meetingabstracts.a4094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导语:2019冠状病毒病大流行增加了手术室外一次性支气管镜的流行,而以前一次性支气管镜主要用作插管辅助工具。然而,直接比较这些支气管镜的性能是有限的。在这项研究中,我们描述了我们的初步经验,研究操作员对多种不同支气管镜在离体模型中如何很好地处理困难气道段的感知。方法:从加州大学圣地亚哥分校肺部和重症监护室招募了9名教师和研究员,使用3台一次性支气管镜(Olympus H-SteriScope, Ambu A-Scope 4, Verathon GlideScope B-Flex)对离体模型进行气道调查。该调查包括在工作通道中使用或不使用工具进入传统上困难的气道段(RB1、RB6、LB1/2和LB6)。在完成这些支气管镜检查后,参与者立即被指示完成一项匿名调查,以1-100的等级将每个支气管镜的操作便利性分为困难部分,数字越高代表越有利。参与者成功参与这些环节的能力也被记录下来。结果:参与者对使用Olympus一次性支气管镜(97.2[94.3-100])和Ambu一次性支气管镜(84.7[74.2-95.2])在工作通道中使用工具进入困难气道段的能力的评分高于GlideScope一次性支气管镜(49.3[36.3-64.3])(表1)。与GlideScope一次性支气管镜相比,使用Olympus和Ambu一次性支气管镜,无论是否在工作通道中使用工具,更多的参与者能够成功地进入选定的困难气道段(表2和表3)。在这项单中心研究中,奥林巴斯H-SteriScope和Ambu a - scope 4一次性支气管镜比GlideScope B-Flex一次性支气管镜具有更高的可操作性,并且能够更好地处理困难的气道段。需要进一步的研究来比较这些一次性支气管镜和可重复使用的支气管镜。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Operator Perception of the Ability of Multiple Single-Use Bronchoscopes to Engage Difficult Airway Segments
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the prevalence of single-use bronchoscopes outside the operating room, where they had previously been employed primarily as intubation adjuncts. However, direct comparisons of the performance of these bronchoscopes has been limited. In this study, we describe our initial experience studying operator perception of how well multiple different bronchoscopes are able to engage difficult airway segments in an ex-vivo model. Methods: Nine faculty and fellows from the Pulmonary and Critical Care Division at UCSD were recruited to complete an airway survey of an ex-vivo model using three single use bronchoscopes (Olympus H-SteriScope, Ambu A-Scope 4, Verathon GlideScope B-Flex). This survey included engagement into traditionally difficult airway segments (RB1, RB6, LB1/2 and LB6) with and without a tool in the working channel. Immediately after completing these bronchoscopies, participants were directed to complete an anonymous survey rating each bronchoscopes ease of maneuverability into the difficult segments on a scale of 1-100 with a higher number representing a more favorable rating. The participant's ability to successfully engage each of these segments was also recorded. Results: Participants rated the ability to maneuver into difficult airway segments with a tool in the working channel by the Olympus singleuse bronchoscope (97.2 [94.3-100]) and Ambu single-use bronchoscope (84.7[74.2-95.2]) higher than the GlideScope single-use bronchoscope (49.3[36.3-64.3]) (Table 1). Additionally, a greater number of participants were able to successfully engage the selected difficult airway segments using the Olympus and Ambu single-use bronchoscopes both with and without a tool in the working channel when compared to the GlideScope single-use bronchoscope (Table 2 and Table 3). Conclusions: In this singlecenter study, the Olympus H-SteriScope and Ambu A-Scope 4 single-use bronchoscopes had a higher perceived maneuverability and were better able to engage difficult airway segments than the GlideScope B-Flex single-use bronchoscope. Further studies are needed to compare these single-use bronchoscopes to reusable bronchoscopes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Characteristics and Factors Associated with Mortality Among COVID-19 Patients and Pneumothorax Patient Selection and Outcomes for Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction: A Single Center Experience Using Quality Improvement Methodology to Increase Efficiency in Pleural Procedures Outcomes Following Medical versus Surgical Management of Chylothorax Association Between Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Severe Excessive Central Airway Collapse
×
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