Use of video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy as a teaching tool for neonatal intubation: A systematic review.

Abstract

Endotracheal intubation and positive pressure ventilation following delivery are required in 32.9% of neonates <31 weeks gestational age and in 5.9% of older newborn babies [1]. Competency in intubation is important, yet opportunities for learners to develop this skill in the clinical environment are limited. Direct laryngoscopy (DL) provides a direct view of the airway during intubation. Unfortunately, visualization of the airway is only available to the primary operator, preventing supervising instructors from simultaneously viewing the airway and allowing them to provide real-time feedback to learners. Video laryngoscopy (VL) is a specialized clinical instrument that utilizes an indirect view of the airway that is digitally projected onto a screen via camera, which allows multiple simultaneous viewers to view the airway during intubation attempts and permits instructors to provide real-time feedback to learners accordingly. This systematic review explores whether VL-supported learning is superior to DL for the development of skill in neonatal intubation. Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were conducted without language restrictions. Studies published between January 2011 and November 2021 were examined. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of VL versus DL for supporting neonatal intubation learning were included. Rate of successful intubation was the primary outcome measure. Both authors independently extracted study data and conducted risk of bias assessment. Four RCTs met the inclusion criteria, with two incorporating crossover designs. Each examined the effectiveness of VL versus DL, with concurrent supervisor support, as a tool for learning neonatal intubation in medical residents. All studies reported significantly higher intubation success rates with VL. VL and real-time supervisor feedback is a more effective tool for supporting the development of neonatal intubation skill, compared with DL. Future investigations should include learners from other professions whose scope of practice includes neonatal intubation (eg, respiratory therapists).