CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of two Macintosh laryngoscope blades in 300 patients.

BACKGROUND: There are two forms of Macintosh laryngoscope blade. Compared with the standard blade, the English blade is longer, its curve is more continuous across the entire length of the blade, the flange of the blade continues much closer to the blade tip, and the height of the flange is shorter.

METHOD: We studied 300 patients to compare the ease of laryngoscopy with each type of Macintosh laryngoscope blade. In a random crossover design, after induction of anaesthesia and neuromuscular block, the two blades were inserted in turn, and the views of the glottis at laryngoscopy (Cormack and Lehane scores) were compared.

RESULTS: There was a difference in the view of the glottis in 80 patients. Among these patients, the view was better for the English blade for 63 patients and the standard blade was better for 17 patients. Laryngoscopy was difficult (grade 3 or 4) for at least one blade in 42 of 300 patients (14%). In these 42 patients, there was a difference in the score between the blades in 28 patients; the view was better for the English blade in 25 patients (60%) and for the standard blade in three patients (7%). The view was significantly better for the English blade than for the standard blade (P<0.001; 95% confidence interval 45-74%).

CONCLUSIONS: In patients in whom laryngoscopy was unexpectedly difficult, the English blade provided a better glottic view significantly more frequently than the standard blade.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app