We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
PRAGMATIC CLINICAL TRIAL
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Randomized Trial of Video Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults.
Critical Care Medicine 2016 November
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of video laryngoscopy on the rate of endotracheal intubation on first laryngoscopy attempt among critically ill adults.
DESIGN: A randomized, parallel-group, pragmatic trial of video compared with direct laryngoscopy for 150 adults undergoing endotracheal intubation by Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine fellows.
SETTING: Medical ICU in a tertiary, academic medical center.
PATIENTS: Critically ill patients 18 years old or older.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to video or direct laryngoscopy for the first attempt at endotracheal intubation.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients assigned to video (n = 74) and direct (n = 76) laryngoscopy were similar at baseline. Despite better glottic visualization with video laryngoscopy, there was no difference in the primary outcome of intubation on the first laryngoscopy attempt (video 68.9% vs direct 65.8%; p = 0.68) in unadjusted analyses or after adjustment for the operator's previous experience with the assigned device (odds ratio for video laryngoscopy on intubation on first attempt 2.02; 95% CI, 0.82-5.02, p = 0.12). Secondary outcomes of time to intubation, lowest arterial oxygen saturation, complications, and in-hospital mortality were not different between video and direct laryngoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill adults undergoing endotracheal intubation, video laryngoscopy improves glottic visualization but does not appear to increase procedural success or decrease complications.
DESIGN: A randomized, parallel-group, pragmatic trial of video compared with direct laryngoscopy for 150 adults undergoing endotracheal intubation by Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine fellows.
SETTING: Medical ICU in a tertiary, academic medical center.
PATIENTS: Critically ill patients 18 years old or older.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to video or direct laryngoscopy for the first attempt at endotracheal intubation.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients assigned to video (n = 74) and direct (n = 76) laryngoscopy were similar at baseline. Despite better glottic visualization with video laryngoscopy, there was no difference in the primary outcome of intubation on the first laryngoscopy attempt (video 68.9% vs direct 65.8%; p = 0.68) in unadjusted analyses or after adjustment for the operator's previous experience with the assigned device (odds ratio for video laryngoscopy on intubation on first attempt 2.02; 95% CI, 0.82-5.02, p = 0.12). Secondary outcomes of time to intubation, lowest arterial oxygen saturation, complications, and in-hospital mortality were not different between video and direct laryngoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill adults undergoing endotracheal intubation, video laryngoscopy improves glottic visualization but does not appear to increase procedural success or decrease complications.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Monitoring Macro- and Microcirculation in the Critically Ill: A Narrative Review.Avicenna Journal of Medicine 2023 July
ANCA-associated vasculitis - Treatment Standard.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2023 November 9
ASA Consensus-based Guidance on Preoperative Management of Patients on Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists.Anesthesiology 2023 November 21
Common postbariatric surgery emergencies for the acute care surgeon: What you need to know.Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 2023 December 2
How we approach titrating PEEP in patients with acute hypoxemic failure.Critical Care : the Official Journal of the Critical Care Forum 2023 October 32
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
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