通过质量改进随机开放标签原位模拟研究开发产科意外困难视频喉镜检查算法

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY International journal of obstetric anesthesia Pub Date : 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1016/j.ijoa.2024.104245
{"title":"通过质量改进随机开放标签原位模拟研究开发产科意外困难视频喉镜检查算法","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ijoa.2024.104245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Video-laryngoscopy is increasingly used during general anesthesia for emergency cesarean deliveries. Given the heightened risk of difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics, addressing challenges in airway management is crucial. In this simulation study, we hypothesized that using a flexible bronchoscope would lead to securing the airway faster than the Eschmann introducer when either device is used in addition to video-laryngoscopy.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Twenty-eight anesthesia trainees (n=14/group) were randomized to use either one of the rescue devices and video-recorded in a simulated scenario of emergency cesarean delivery. The primary outcome was the time difference in establishing intubation; secondary outcomes were the differences in incidence of hypoxemia, need for bag and mask ventilation, and failed intubation between the two rescue devices.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Mean (±SD) time to intubation using flexible bronchoscopy was shorter compared to using an Eschmann introducer (24 ± 10 <em>vs</em> 86 ± 35 s; <em>P</em>&lt;0.0001; difference in mean 62 seconds, 95% CI 42 to 82 seconds). In the fiberoptic bronchoscopy group, there were no episodes of hypoxemia or need for bag and mask ventilation; in contrast both such events occurred frequently in the Eschmann introducer group (71%, 10/14); <em>P</em>=0.0002). All flexible bronchoscopy-aided intubations were established on the first attempt. The incidence of failed intubation was similar in both groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our data from simulated emergency tracheal intubation suggest that flexible bronchoscopy combined with video-laryngoscopy results in faster intubation time than using an Eschmann introducer combined with video-laryngoscopy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":14250,"journal":{"name":"International journal of obstetric anesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of the obstetric unanticipated difficult video-laryngoscopy algorithm through a quality improvement randomized open-label in situ simulation study\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijoa.2024.104245\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Video-laryngoscopy is increasingly used during general anesthesia for emergency cesarean deliveries. Given the heightened risk of difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics, addressing challenges in airway management is crucial. In this simulation study, we hypothesized that using a flexible bronchoscope would lead to securing the airway faster than the Eschmann introducer when either device is used in addition to video-laryngoscopy.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Twenty-eight anesthesia trainees (n=14/group) were randomized to use either one of the rescue devices and video-recorded in a simulated scenario of emergency cesarean delivery. The primary outcome was the time difference in establishing intubation; secondary outcomes were the differences in incidence of hypoxemia, need for bag and mask ventilation, and failed intubation between the two rescue devices.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Mean (±SD) time to intubation using flexible bronchoscopy was shorter compared to using an Eschmann introducer (24 ± 10 <em>vs</em> 86 ± 35 s; <em>P</em>&lt;0.0001; difference in mean 62 seconds, 95% CI 42 to 82 seconds). In the fiberoptic bronchoscopy group, there were no episodes of hypoxemia or need for bag and mask ventilation; in contrast both such events occurred frequently in the Eschmann introducer group (71%, 10/14); <em>P</em>=0.0002). All flexible bronchoscopy-aided intubations were established on the first attempt. The incidence of failed intubation was similar in both groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our data from simulated emergency tracheal intubation suggest that flexible bronchoscopy combined with video-laryngoscopy results in faster intubation time than using an Eschmann introducer combined with video-laryngoscopy.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of obstetric anesthesia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of obstetric anesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959289X24002577\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of obstetric anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959289X24002577","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

视频喉镜越来越多地用于紧急剖宫产的全身麻醉。鉴于产科气管插管困难的风险增加,应对气道管理方面的挑战至关重要。在这项模拟研究中,我们假设在使用视频喉镜的同时使用柔性支气管镜会比 Eschmann 导入器更快地确保气道安全。28 名麻醉受训人员(14 人/组)被随机分配使用其中一种抢救设备,并在紧急剖宫产的模拟场景中进行录像。主要结果是建立插管的时间差;次要结果是两种抢救设备在低氧血症发生率、袋罩通气需求和插管失败方面的差异。与使用埃施曼导引器相比,使用柔性支气管镜插管的平均时间(±SD)更短(24 ± 10 86 ± 35 秒;<0.0001;平均时间差为 62 秒,95% CI 为 42 至 82 秒)。在纤维支气管镜组中,没有出现低氧血症或需要袋罩通气的情况;相比之下,在埃施曼导入器组中这两种情况经常出现(71%,10/14);=0.0002)。所有柔性支气管镜辅助插管均在首次尝试时完成。两组插管失败的发生率相似。我们的模拟急诊气管插管数据表明,与使用埃施曼导引器和视频喉镜相比,柔性支气管镜联合视频喉镜可缩短插管时间。
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
Development of the obstetric unanticipated difficult video-laryngoscopy algorithm through a quality improvement randomized open-label in situ simulation study

Background

Video-laryngoscopy is increasingly used during general anesthesia for emergency cesarean deliveries. Given the heightened risk of difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics, addressing challenges in airway management is crucial. In this simulation study, we hypothesized that using a flexible bronchoscope would lead to securing the airway faster than the Eschmann introducer when either device is used in addition to video-laryngoscopy.

Methods

Twenty-eight anesthesia trainees (n=14/group) were randomized to use either one of the rescue devices and video-recorded in a simulated scenario of emergency cesarean delivery. The primary outcome was the time difference in establishing intubation; secondary outcomes were the differences in incidence of hypoxemia, need for bag and mask ventilation, and failed intubation between the two rescue devices.

Results

Mean (±SD) time to intubation using flexible bronchoscopy was shorter compared to using an Eschmann introducer (24 ± 10 vs 86 ± 35 s; P<0.0001; difference in mean 62 seconds, 95% CI 42 to 82 seconds). In the fiberoptic bronchoscopy group, there were no episodes of hypoxemia or need for bag and mask ventilation; in contrast both such events occurred frequently in the Eschmann introducer group (71%, 10/14); P=0.0002). All flexible bronchoscopy-aided intubations were established on the first attempt. The incidence of failed intubation was similar in both groups.

Conclusions

Our data from simulated emergency tracheal intubation suggest that flexible bronchoscopy combined with video-laryngoscopy results in faster intubation time than using an Eschmann introducer combined with video-laryngoscopy.

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
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.10%
发文量
285
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia is the only journal publishing original articles devoted exclusively to obstetric anesthesia and bringing together all three of its principal components; anesthesia care for operative delivery and the perioperative period, pain relief in labour and care of the critically ill obstetric patient. • Original research (both clinical and laboratory), short reports and case reports will be considered. • The journal also publishes invited review articles and debates on topical and controversial subjects in the area of obstetric anesthesia. • Articles on related topics such as perinatal physiology and pharmacology and all subjects of importance to obstetric anaesthetists/anesthesiologists are also welcome. The journal is peer-reviewed by international experts. Scholarship is stressed to include the focus on discovery, application of knowledge across fields, and informing the medical community. Through the peer-review process, we hope to attest to the quality of scholarships and guide the Journal to extend and transform knowledge in this important and expanding area.
期刊最新文献
Pain during caesarean delivery: what gets measured, gets managed Obstetric hemorrhage risk assessment using the maximum allowable blood loss calculation: are we on the right track? Anaesthetic considerations for impacted fetal head at caesarean delivery: a focused review Impact of an interdisciplinary process to increase utilization of neuraxial anesthesia for cesarean delivery: A retrospective database analysis Transcutaneous electrical acupuncture point stimulation and quality of recovery following cesarean delivery: A randomized controlled trial.
×
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