First-pass Intubation Success Rate Research Articles

Comparison of video laryngoscope, video stylet, and flexible videoscope for transoral endotracheal intubation in patients with difficult airways: a randomized, parallel-group study

BackgroundThe 2022 ASA guidelines recommend the video laryngoscope, video stylet, and flexible videoscope as airway management tools. This study aims to compare the efficacy of three airway devices in intubating patients with difficult airways.MethodsA total of 177 patients were selected and randomized into the following three groups: the video laryngoscope group (Group VL, n = 59), video stylet group (Group VS, n = 59), and flexible videoscope group (Group FV, n = 59). The success rate of the first-pass intubation, time of tracheal intubation, level of glottic exposure, and occurrence of intubation-related adverse events were recorded and analyzed.ResultsAll patients were successfully intubated with three devices. The first-pass intubation success rate was significantly higher in Groups VS and FV than in Group VL (96.61% vs. 93.22% vs. 83.05%, P < 0.01), but it was similar in the first-pass intubation success rate between Groups VS and FV(P > 0.05). The number of patients categorized as Wilson-Cormack-Lehane grade I-II was fewer in Group VL than in Groups VS and FV (77.97% vs. 98.30% vs. 100%, P = 0.0281). The time to tracheal intubation was significantly longer in Group FV(95.20 ± 4.01) than in Groups VL(44.56 ± 4.42) and VS(26.88 ± 4.51) (P < 0.01). No significant differences were found among the three groups in terms of adverse intubation reactions (P > 0.05).ConclusionsIn patients with difficult airways requiring intubation, use of the video stylet has the advantage of a relatively shorter intubation time, and the flexible videoscope and video stylet yield a higher first-pass intubation success rate and clearer glottic exposure than the use of the video laryngoscope.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry. No: ChiCTR2200061560, June 29, 2022.

Efficacy and adverse events profile of videolaryngoscopy in critically ill patients: subanalysis of the INTUBE study

BackgroundTracheal intubation is a high-risk procedure in the critically ill, with increased intubation failure rates and a high risk of other adverse events. Videolaryngoscopy might improve intubation outcomes in this population, but evidence remains conflicting, and its impact on adverse event rates is debated. MethodsThis is a subanalysis of a large international prospective cohort of critically ill patients (INTUBE Study) performed from 1 October 2018 to 31 July 2019 and involving 197 sites from 29 countries across five continents. Our primary aim was to determine the first-pass intubation success rates of videolaryngoscopy. Secondary aims were characterising (a) videolaryngoscopy use in the critically ill patient population and (b) the incidence of severe adverse effects compared with direct laryngoscopy. ResultsOf 2916 patients, videolaryngoscopy was used in 500 patients (17.2%) and direct laryngoscopy in 2416 (82.8%). First-pass intubation success was higher with videolaryngoscopy compared with direct laryngoscopy (84% vs 79%, P=0.02). Patients undergoing videolaryngoscopy had a higher frequency of difficult airway predictors (60% vs 40%, P<0.001). In adjusted analyses, videolaryngoscopy increased the probability of first-pass intubation success, with an OR of 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–1.87). Videolaryngoscopy was not significantly associated with risk of major adverse events (odds ratio 1.24, 95% CI 0.95–1.62) or cardiovascular events (odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.60–1.02). ConclusionsIn critically ill patients, videolaryngoscopy was associated with higher first-pass intubation success rates, despite being used in a population at higher risk of difficult airway management. Videolaryngoscopy was not associated with overall risk of major adverse events. Clinical trial registrationNCT03616054.

Association between First-pass Intubation Success and Enhanced PPE Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objectives We evaluated first-pass endotracheal intubation (ETI) success within the critical care transport (CCT) environment using a natural experiment created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Our primary objective was to evaluate if the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) or the COVID-19 time period was associated with differences in first-pass success rates of ETI within a large CCT system with a high baseline ETI first-pass success rate. We hypothesized that pandemic-related challenges would be associated with decreased first-pass success rates. Methods We performed a retrospective before-after cohort study of airway management by CCT personnel relative to the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a mixed effects logistic regression to evaluate the association between enhanced PPE (N95 mask, eye protection) use and the pandemic time period on first-pass intubation success, while controlling for other factors potentially associated with intubation success. Variables in the final model included patient demographics (age, sex, and race), body mass index, medical category (trauma versus non-trauma), interfacility or scene response, blade size (Macintosh 3 versus 4), use of face mask, use of eye protection, and crew member length of service. Results We identified 1279 cases involving intubation attempts on adult patients during the study period. A total of 1133 cases were included in the final analysis, with an overall first-pass success rate of 95.7% (96.4% pre-COVID-19 and 94.8% during COVID-19). In our final mixed effects logistic regression model, enhanced PPE use and the COVID-19 time period were not associated with first-pass intubation success rate. Conclusion In a large regional CCT system with a high ETI first-pass success rate, neither PPE use nor the COVID-19 time period were associated with differences in ETI first-pass success while controlling for relevant patient and operational factors. Other emergency medical services (EMS) systems may have encountered different effects of pandemic-related PPE use on intubation success rates. Further studies are needed to evaluate the influence of sustained use of enhanced PPE or changes in training or procedural experience on post-pandemic ETI first-pass success rates for non-CCT EMS clinicians.

Intubation success in prehospital emergency anaesthesia: a retrospective observational analysis of the Inter-Changeable Operator Model (ICOM)

BackgroundPre hospital emergency anaesthesia (PHEA) is a complex procedure with significant risks. First-pass intubation success (FPS) is recommended as a quality indicator in pre hospital advanced airway management. Previous data demonstrating significantly lower FPS by non-physicians does not distinguish between non-physicians operating in isolation or within physician teams. In several UK HEMS, the role of the intubating provider is interchangeable between the physician and critical care paramedic—termed the Inter-Changeable Operator Model (ICOM). The objectives of this study were to compare first-pass intubation success rate between physicians and critical care paramedics (CCP) in a large regional, multi-organisational dataset of trauma PHEA patients, and to report the application of the ICOM.MethodsA retrospective observational study of consecutive trauma patients ≥ 16 years old who underwent PHEA at two different ICOM Helicopter Emergency Medical Services in the East of England, 2015–2020. Data are presented as number (percentage) and median [inter-quartile range]. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare proportions, reported as odds ratio (OR (95% confidence interval, 95% CI)), p value. The study design complied with the STROBE (Strengthening The Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology) reporting guidelines.ResultsIn the study period, 13,654 patients were attended. 674 (4.9%) trauma patients ≥ 16 years old who underwent PHEA were included in the final analysis: the median age was 44 [28–63] years old, and 502 (74.5%) were male. There was no significant difference in the FPS rate between physicians and CCPs—90.2% and 87.4% respectively, OR 1.3 (95% CI 0.7–2.5), p = 0.38. The cumulative first, second, third, and fourth-pass intubation success rates were 89.6%, 98.7%, 99.7%, and 100%. Patients who had a physician-operated initial intubation attempt weighed more and had a higher heart rate, compared to those who had a CCP-operated initial attempt.ConclusionIn an ICOM setting, we demonstrated 100% intubation success in adult trauma patients undergoing PHEA. There was no significant difference in first-pass intubation success between physicians and CCPs.

Tracheal Intubation in Emergency Departments in China: A National Cross-Sectional Survey.

BackgroundTracheal intubation is a necessary but risky procedure performed in emergency departments (EDs) around the world. Relatively high morbidity has been encountered in Chinese EDs, which has raised concerns about peri-intubation ED management. This study aimed to investigate intubation procedures and identify any areas for improvement in Chinese EDs.MethodsThis was a questionnaire-based survey lasting 1 month (March 2021) in 41 tertiary-care hospital EDs in mainland China. The primary outcome was complications associated with intubation. Secondary outcomes were the first-pass success rate and blood pressure variations during intubation. Univariate and binary logistic regression analyses were used to find possible risk factors for first-pass intubation failure.ResultsIn total, 1,020 replies were analyzed out of 1,080 surveys submitted (94.4% response rate). Most patients were elderly men with severe medical conditions like cardiac arrest (24.8%). In total, 97.2% of patients were given preoxygenation, and 48.1% received some form of pretreatment. Induction drugs (e.g., etomidate and ketamine) were less often used: 39.9% of intubations used sedatives, 5.5% used analgesics, and only 5.3% used muscle relaxants. The overall first-pass intubation success rate was 85.7% and was accompanied by a 19.8% adverse event rate. A marked decrease in blood pressure after intubation was also identified.ConclusionThis survey found an 85.7% tracheal intubation first-pass success rate (which is relatively high compared to other countries) and a 19.8% adverse event rate (which is also relatively high). Given the very low rate of using induction medications (5.3% used muscle relaxants), future education should focus on induction drugs and traditional intubation techniques.

A Meta-Analysis on the Effectiveness of Video Laryngoscopy versus Laryngoscopy for Emergency Orotracheal Intubation.

Background Video laryngoscopy has been associated with some orotracheal intubations and enhances the glottic view at time of laryngoscopy and the success rate of the intubation in patients from the emergency department and the intensive care unit. In usual cases, direct laryngoscopy is performed among the patients from the emergency department or the intensive care unit. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we draw the comparison between the video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for the emergency orotracheal intubation. Objective The objective of the study was to identify the clinical efficacy of video laryngoscopy versus laryngoscopy for emergency orotracheal intubation. Materials and Methods MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were analyzed from 2003 to 2020. Keywords used for searching the studies were “laryngoscopy,” “video laryngoscopy,” “direct laryngoscopy,” “emergency department,” “intensive care unit,” “orotracheal,” “video laryngoscope,” “glidescope,” “airway scope,” “airway,” “Macintosh laryngoscopy,” “airway management,” “tracheal intubation,” “orotracheal intubation,” and “intubation.” Results The first-pass intubation success rates in the intensive care unit were low in video laryngoscopy with 95% CI 1.21 (1.13–1.30) and heterogeneity I2 = 78% favoring direct laryngoscopy nonsignificantly with low heterogeneity. Odds ratio for airway trauma or dental damage was 0.67, 95% CI (0.18–2.54), reported higher in video laryngoscopy. Complications with oesophageal laryngoscopy were higher in video laryngoscopy with risk ratio 0.16, 95% CI (0.09–0.29), odds ratio 0.88, 95% CI (0.65–1.18) for sever hypoxemia, risk ratio 1.53, 95% CI (1.02–2.28) for cardiovascular collapse, risk ratio with 95% CI 1.11 (0.59–2.07) for aspiration complications, and odds ratio 1.32, 95% CI (0.95, 1.85) for Inexperienced medical staff handling laryngoscopy. Conclusion No significant efficiency was noticed in using video laryngoscopy when compared with direct laryngoscopy with the available data. The data reported in studies are not enough for efficient clinical analysis of the benefits of using video laryngoscopy over direct laryngoscopy. Thus, information such as length of stay, mortality, sever complications, and length of hospital stay must be reported.

Direct vs. Video-Laryngoscopy for Intubation by Paramedics of Simulated COVID-19 Patients under Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

A safe way of securing the airway with an endotracheal tube is one of the priorities of an advanced cardiovascular life support algorithm for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study was to compare intubation success rates (ISR) and intubation time (IT) of different laryngoscopes for simulated COVID-19 patients under cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, crossover trial. Fifty four active paramedics performed endotracheal intubation with a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (MAC) and McGrath videolaryngoscope (McGrath) with and without personal protective equipment (PPE). Without PPE, ISRs were 87% and 98% for MAC and McGrath, respectively (p = 0.32). ITs were 22.5 s (IQR: 19–26) and 19.5 s (IQR: 17–21) for MAC and McGrath, respectively (p = 0.005). With PPE, first-pass ISR were 30% and 89% with MAC and McGrath, respectively (p < 0.001). The overall success rates were 83% vs. 100% (p = 0.002). Median ITs were 34.0 s (IQR: 29.5–38.5) and 24.8 s (IQR: 21–29) for MAC and McGrath, respectively (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the McGrath videolaryngoscope appears to possess significant advantages over the Macintosh direct laryngoscope when used by paramedics in suspected or confirmed COVID-19 intubation scenarios.

292 First-Pass Success and Adverse Events in the Emergency Intubation of Children

While first-pass intubation success rates are similar for adults and children, pediatric intubation is an infrequent and stressful event in most emergency departments (ED). A report from the 2002-2012 National Emergency Airway Registry (NEAR) showed infants are at highest risk for first-pass intubation failure. Our goal was to describe patient factors and intubation practices in the emergency intubation of young children and estimate their associations with first-pass success and adverse events (AE).

Comparison of the Efficiency and Usability of Aerosol Box and Intubation Tent on Intubation of a Manikin Using Personal Protective Equipment: A Randomized Crossover Study.

BackgroundThe aerosol box and intubation tent are improvised barrier-enclosure devices developed during the novel coronavirus pandemic to protect health care workers from aerosol transmission.ObjectiveUsing time to intubation as a crude proxy, we aimed to compare the efficiency and usability of the aerosol box and intubation tent in a simulated manikin.MethodsThis was a single-center, randomized, crossover manikin study involving 28 participants (9 anesthetists, 16 emergency physicians, and 3 intensivists). Each participant performed rapid sequence intubations in a random sequence of three different scenarios: 1) no device use; 2) aerosol box; 3) intubation tent. We compared the time to intubation between different scenarios.ResultsThe median total intubation time with no device use, aerosol box, and intubation tent were 23.7 s (interquartile range [IQR] 19.4–28.4 s), 30.9 s (IQR 24.1–52.5 s), and 26.0 s (IQR 22.1–30.8 s), respectively. Post hoc analysis showed a significantly longer intubation time using the aerosol box compared with no device use (p < 0.001) and compared with the intubation tent (p < 0.001). The difference between the intubation tent and no device use was not significant. The first-pass intubation success rate did not differ between the groups. Only aerosol box use had resulted in breaches of personal protective equipment. Participants considered intubation with the intubation tent more favorable than the aerosol box.ConclusionsThe intubation tent seems to have a better barrier-enclosure design than the aerosol box, with a reasonable balance between efficiency and usability. Further evaluation of its efficacy in preventing aerosol dispersal and in human studies are warranted prior to recommendation of widespread adoption.

Hemodynamic Effects of Ketamine Versus Etomidate for Prehospital Rapid Sequence Intubation

ObjectiveRapid sequence intubation (RSI) is often required in managing critically ill patients in the prehospital setting. Although etomidate is a commonly used induction agent for RSI, ketamine has gained new interest in prehospital management with reported neutral hemodynamic effects. Limited data exist to support ketamine as an alternative to etomidate, particularly in the prehospital setting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate hemodynamic changes after the administration of ketamine versus etomidate in prehospital RSI. MethodsThis retrospective study evaluated adult patients undergoing prehospital RSI over 13 months within a regional emergency transport medicine service. Hypotension was defined as a 20% decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP) within 15 minutes of receiving ketamine or etomidate. Hemodynamic data were collected 15 minutes before and 15 minutes after administration or until additional sedative medications were given. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (Version 21; IBM Corp, Armonk, NY), with P < .05 considered significant. ResultsOne hundred thirteen patients met the inclusion criteria (ketamine, n = 33; etomidate, n = 80), with the primary reasons for intubation being respiratory failure and trauma. There was no difference between the incidence of patients who experienced a 20% decrease in SBP (16% etomidate vs. 18% ketamine, P = .79). There were no significant differences in SBP pre- to postadministration between ketamine and etomidate. ConclusionNo hemodynamic differences occurred between patients who received ketamine versus etomidate for prehospital RSI. Neither drug was associated with an increased need for additional sedatives, and neither drug was associated with an increased first-pass intubation success rate. Larger, prospective, powered studies are required to identify patients who may benefit from either ketamine or etomidate.

Evaluation of the Effect of Intubation Box use on Tracheal Intubation Difficulty with King Vision® and Truview Videolaryngoscope in Manikin in a Tertiary Care Hospital.

The procedures of introducing an airway by intubation are associated with increased risk of aerosolisation of SARS-CoV-2 virus, posing a high risk to the personnel involved. Newer and novel methods such as the intubation box have been developed to increase the safety of healthcare workers during intubation. In this study, 33 anaesthesiologist and critical care specialists intubated the trachea of the airway manikin (US Laerdal Medical AS™) 4 times using a King Vision® videolaryngoscope and TRUVIEW PCD™ videolaryngoscope (with and without an intubation box as described by Lai). Intubation time was primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were first-pass intubation success rate, percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score and peak force to maxillary incisors. Intubation time and the number of times a click was heard during tracheal intubation were considerably higher in both groups when an intubation box was used (Table 1). When comparing the two laryngoscopes, the King Vision® videolaryngoscope enabled much less time to intubate than did the TRUVIEW laryngoscope, both with and without the intubation box. (P<0.001) In both laryngoscope groups, first-pass successful intubation was higher without the intubation box, although the difference was statistically insignificant. POGO score was not affected by intubation box but a higher score was observed with King Vision® laryngoscope (Tables 1,2). This study indicates that use of an intubation box makes intubation difficult and increases the time needed to perform it. King Vision® videolaryngoscope results in lesser intubation time and better glottic view as compared to TRUVIEW laryngoscope.

Analysis of tracheal intubation in out-of-hospital helicopter emergency medicine recorded by video laryngoscopy

BackgroundTracheal intubation remains the gold standard of airway management in emergency medicine and maximizing safety, intubation success, and especially first-pass intubation success (FPS) in these situations is imperative.MethodsWe conducted a prospective observational study on all 12 helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) bases of the Swiss Air Rescue, between February 15, 2018, and February 14, 2019. All 428 patients on whom out-of-hospital advanced airway management was performed by the HEMS crew were included. The C-MAC video laryngoscope was used as the primary device for tracheal intubation. Intubation procedures were recorded by the video laryngoscope and precise time points were recorded to verify the time necessary for each attempt and the overall procedure time until successful intubation. The videos were further analysed for problems and complications during airway management by an independent reviewer. Additionally, a questionnaire about the intubation procedure, basic characteristics of the patient, circumstances, environmental factors, and the provider’s level of experience in airway management was filled out. Main outcome measures were FPS of tracheal intubation, overall success rate, overall intubation time, problems and complications of video laryngoscopy.ResultsFPS rate was 87.6% and overall success rate 98.6%. Success rates, overall time to intubation, and subjective difficulty were not associated to the providers’ expertise in airway management. In patients undergoing CPR FPS was 84.8%, in trauma patients 86.4% and in non-trauma patients 93.3%. FPS in patients with difficult airway characteristics, facial trauma/burns or obesity ranges between 87 and 89%. Performing airway management indoors or inside an ambulance resulted in a significantly higher FPS of 91.1% compared to outdoor locations (p < 0.001). Direct solar irradiation on the screen, fogging of the lens, and blood on the camera significantly impaired FPS. Several issues for further improvements in the use of video laryngoscopy in the out-of-hospital setting and for quality control in airway management were identified.ConclusionAirway management using the C-MAC video laryngoscope with Macintosh blade in a group of operators with mixed experience showed high FPS and overall rates of intubation success. Video recording emergency intubations may improve education and quality control.

Emergency airway management in a Singapore centre: A registry study

Intubations in the emergency department (ED) are often performed immediately without the benefit of pre-selection or the ability to defer. Multicentre observational data provide a framework for understanding emergency airway management but regional practice variation may exist. We aim to describe the intubation indications, prevalence of difficult airway features, peri-intubation adverse events and intubator characteristics in the ED of the National University Hospital, Singapore. We conducted a prospective observational study over a period of 31 months from 1 March 2016 to 28 September 2018. Information regarding each intubation attempt, such as indications for intubation, airway assessment, intubation techniques used, peri-intubation adverse events, and clinical outcomes, was collected and described. There were 669 patients, with male predominance (67.3%, 450/669) and mean age of 60.9 years (standard deviation [SD] 18.1). Of these, 25.6% were obese or grossly obese and majority were intubated due to medical indications (84.8%, 567/669). Emergency physicians' initial impression of difficult airway correlated with a higher grade of glottis view on laryngoscopy. First-pass intubation success rate was 86.5%, with hypoxia (11.2%, 75/669) and hypotension (3.7%, 25/669) reported as the two most common adverse events. Majority was rapid sequence intubation (67.3%, 450/669) and the device used was most frequently a video laryngoscope (75.6%, 506/669). More than half of the intubations were performed by postgraduate clinicians in year 5 and above, clinical fellows or attending physicians. In our centre, the majority of emergency intubations were performed for medical indications by senior doctors utilising rapid sequence intubation and video laryngoscopy with good ffirst-attempt success.

Macintosh laryngoscope versus AMBU King Vision video laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation using a COVID-19 barrier box: A randomized controlled trial.

Background:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) barrier box is being used by health-care workers for protection against aerosol-transmitted infection. Usually, a Macintosh laryngoscope (MC) or a video laryngoscope (VL) is used for endotracheal intubation (ETI). We aimed to determine the most suitable laryngoscope blade in terms of time to ETI, ease of ETI, and the first-pass success rate.Methods:American Society of Anesthesiologists Grade I and II patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia were randomized into the MC and the King Vision VL groups in a 1:1 ratio. ETI was performed using either the MC (the MC group) or the King Vision VL (the VL group) with a COVID-19 barrier box. The first-pass intubation success rate, intubation time, and ease of ETI were analyzed.Results:The first-pass success rate was higher in the MC group (P = 0.43). The mean duration of ETI was 33 s and 47 s in the MC group and VL group, respectively. The difference was statistically significant between the groups (P = 0.002). The ease of ETI was comparable between the groups (P = 0.57), and the Cormack–Lehane grade was significantly different between the groups (P = 0.0025).Conclusion:ETI duration was shorter in the MC group than in the VL group. Hence, a MC can be used along with a COVID-19 barrier box by experienced operators for the prevention of aerosol spread.

COVID-19 aerosol box as protection from droplet and aerosol contaminations in healthcare workers performing airway intubation: a randomised cross-over simulation study

BackgroundConcerns over high transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 have led to innovation and usage of an aerosol box to protect healthcare workers during airway intubation in patients with COVID-19. Its efficacy...

Beyond Tools: Continuous High-Fidelity Training at the Center of Successful First-Pass Intubation in Ground Emergency Medical Services

ObjectiveIncreased emphasis on the use of video laryngoscopy in emergency medical services has potentially caused providers to forfeit the skills required to perform direct laryngoscopy. The purpose of this study was to determine if the introduction of a continuous high-fidelity training program improves first-pass intubation success in a non–rapid sequence induction ground-based emergency medical services agency with an established video laryngoscopy program. MethodsThis is a retrospective analysis of quality improvement data of advanced airway management performed by an ambulance service between 2012 and 2019. A mandatory biannual high-fidelity simulation training curriculum was introduced at the beginning of 2017. ResultsA total of 459 patients underwent intubation attempts during the 7-year study period. First-pass intubation success improved from 57.6% to 81.4%, an improvement of 23.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.4-31.5; P < .001), and overall intubation success improved from 77% to 91%, an improvement of 14.1% (95% CI, 7.3-20.3; P < .001). The average number of intubation attempts per patient decreased by 0.19 (95% CI, 0.09-0.29; P < .0003). The mean time of arrival to intubation time increased by 2.21 minutes (95% CI, 0.84-3.58; P = .0016). ConclusionImplementation of a high-fidelity airway training program is associated with improvements in overall endotracheal intubation and first-pass endotracheal intubation success rates in all adult patient categories.

Analysis of the airway registry from an academic emergency department in South Africa.

Airway management is an essential skill for doctors working in the emergency department (ED). Safety and efficacy are crucial to its success. Analysis of an airway registry can provide feedback that can be used for quality improvement purposes. To examine the first airway registry from an ED in South Africa (SA), a low- to middle-income country (LMIC), and compare the findings with international data. A retrospective analysis of 13 months' data from the airway registry of an academic ED with an annual census of 60 000 patients. Data analysed included demographics, indications for intubation, intubator training level, type of intubation device, number of attempts, adverse events, pre-oxygenation methods, and drug and intravenous fluid use. A total of 321 intubations were included. The majority of the patients (71.6%) had non-traumatic indications for intubation. The overall first-pass intubation success (FPS) rate for doctors was 81.8%. Although this rate is lower than the mean rate suggested in an international meta-analysis (84.1%), it is within the 95% confidence interval (80.1 - 87.4%). Overall FPS rates showed no difference between video laryngoscopy (81.7%) compared with direct laryngoscopy (73.3%) (p-value 0.079), although better glottic views were obtained with video laryngoscopy (80.5% were Cormack-Lehane grade 1). Analysis of pre-oxygenation methods found that although sicker patients had received more aggressive pre-oxygenation, e.g. with non-invasive or bag-mask ventilation techniques, they still desaturated more often (35.8% and 62.5%, respectively) than less sick patients who received simple non-rebreather facemask pre-oxygenation (4.5%). This analysis of the first airway registry from an SA ED highlights that airway management in an LMIC can be performed on par with accepted international standards. It serves as a good baseline for further research into airway management in other LMICs and provides useful feedback for quality improvement purposes.

Comparison of drugs used for intubation of pediatric trauma patients

PurposeRapid sequence intubation (RSI) drugs, such as propofol, affect clinical outcomes, but this has not been examined in the pediatric population. This descriptive study compares the outcomes associated with intubation drugs used in pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. MethodsA retrospective chart review and descriptive analysis of intubated TBI patients, ages 0–17, admitted to Children's Hospital London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC) from January 2006–December 2016 was performed. ResultsOut of 259 patients intubated, complete data was available for 107 cases. Average injury severity score was 28; 46 were intubated at LHSC, 55 at primary care site, and 6 on scene. Intubation attempts were recorded in 87 of 107 paper charts. First-pass intubation success rate was 88.5%. Propofol (n = 21), midazolam (n = 31), etomidate (n = 13), and ketamine (n = 7) were the most commonly used intubation drugs. Paralytics were used in 50% of patients. Following use of propofol, Pediatric Adjusted Shock Index was increased as a result of worsening hypotension. Mean total hospital length of stay was 21 days with 7.5 days in ICU. Survival was 87%. ConclusionGreat variability exists in the use of induction agents and paralytics for RSI. Propofol was commonly used and is potentially associated with poorer clinical outcomes. Type of StudyRetrospective. Level of EvidenceIV

First-Pass Success Intubations Using Video Laryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopy: A Retrospective Prehospital Ambulance Service Study

ObjectiveIn emergency medicine, endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for airway management. First-pass intubation success is beneficial because it secures the patient airway more quickly and avoids complications associated with repeated attempts, such as bleeding and swelling of soft tissue. The key to first-pass success is the ability to visualize the laryngeal inlet. Visualization can be accomplished using traditional direct laryngoscopy or video laryngoscopy. The purpose of our study was to compare the rate of successful first-pass endotracheal intubations using a video laryngoscope with that using a direct visualization laryngoscope in a prehospital emergency setting. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed data that had been prospectively collected in our emergency department regarding patients who underwent endotracheal intubation performed by personnel from a single local ambulance service from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2015. ResultsOne hundred eighty-one patients were intubated using video laryngoscopy and 115 using direct visualization laryngoscopy. The first-pass endotracheal intubation success rate using video laryngoscopy was 12.6% higher than with direct laryngoscopy. ConclusionThis retrospective study shows that video laryngoscopy had a higher first-pass success rate than direct laryngoscopy. This is promising because decreasing failure rates provide better patient outcomes.

Effect of the introduction of C-MAC videolaryngoscopy on first-pass intubation success rates for emergency medicine registrars.

The present study investigated the impact of introducing C-MAC videolaryngoscopy as the standard method of visualising glottic structures on first-pass intubation success of emergency medicine (EM) registrars in a large tertiary academic hospital in New Zealand. In this retrospective cohort study, all patients receiving attempted orotracheal intubation in Auckland City Hospital ED 1 year prior to and 1 year after the introduction of C-MAC videolaryngoscopy were compared. The primary outcome was first-pass intubation success rates by EM registrars. Secondary outcomes were first-pass success rates by all intubators, and incidence of any complication of intubation. There were 163 intubations by EM registrars from June 2015 to August 2017. There was a clinically important and statistically significant improvement in first-pass success from 59.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 44.1-68.8%) to 85.1% (95% CI 76.0-91.2%, P < 0.001) after the introduction of C-MAC. In multivariate analysis, the independent predictors of success were: Airway Not Predicted Difficult, odds ratio (OR) 2.49 (95% CI 1.06-5.85, P = 0.037); and use of videolaryngoscope, OR 4.49 (95% CI 1.85-10.91, P = 0.001). Overall, complications of intubation improved significantly after introduction of C-MAC (28.9%, 95% CI 19.9-40.0% prior to C-MAC introduction; 16.1%, 95% CI 9.7-25.3% after; P = 0.048). This is the first published study specifically addressing EM registrar intubation success rates in New Zealand, adding to the existing body of data suggesting that videolaryngoscopy may improve success rates for novice intubators.