We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparison of Macintosh, Truview EVO2, Glidescope, and Airwayscope laryngoscope use in patients with cervical spine immobilization.
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008 November
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Pentax AWS, Glidescope, and the Truview EVO2, in comparison with the Macintosh laryngoscope, when performing tracheal intubation in patients with neck immobilization using manual in-line axial cervical spine stabilization.
METHODS: One hundred and twenty consenting patients presenting for surgery requiring tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using a Macintosh (n=30), Glidescope (n=30), Truview EVO2 (n=30), or AWS (n=30) laryngoscope. All patients were intubated by one of the three anaesthetists experienced in the use of each laryngoscope.
RESULTS: The Glidescope, AWS, and Truview EVO2 each reduced the intubation difficulty score (IDS), improved the Cormack and Lehane glottic view, and reduced the need for optimization manoeuvres, compared with the Macintosh. The mean IDS was significantly lower with the Glidescope and AWS compared with the Truview EVO2 device, and the IDS was lowest with the AWS. The duration of tracheal intubation attempts was significantly shorter with the Macintosh compared with the other devices. There were no differences in success rates between the devices tested. The AWS produced the least haemodynamic stimulation.
CONCLUSIONS: The Glidescope and AWS laryngoscopes required more time but reduced intubation difficulty and improved glottic view over the Macintosh laryngoscope more than the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope when used in patients undergoing cervical spine immobilization.
METHODS: One hundred and twenty consenting patients presenting for surgery requiring tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using a Macintosh (n=30), Glidescope (n=30), Truview EVO2 (n=30), or AWS (n=30) laryngoscope. All patients were intubated by one of the three anaesthetists experienced in the use of each laryngoscope.
RESULTS: The Glidescope, AWS, and Truview EVO2 each reduced the intubation difficulty score (IDS), improved the Cormack and Lehane glottic view, and reduced the need for optimization manoeuvres, compared with the Macintosh. The mean IDS was significantly lower with the Glidescope and AWS compared with the Truview EVO2 device, and the IDS was lowest with the AWS. The duration of tracheal intubation attempts was significantly shorter with the Macintosh compared with the other devices. There were no differences in success rates between the devices tested. The AWS produced the least haemodynamic stimulation.
CONCLUSIONS: The Glidescope and AWS laryngoscopes required more time but reduced intubation difficulty and improved glottic view over the Macintosh laryngoscope more than the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope when used in patients undergoing cervical spine immobilization.
Full text links
Related Resources
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
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