C-MAC compared with direct laryngoscopy for intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilization: A manikin trial.
The American journal of emergency medicine · 2017-03-16 · Randomised trial
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare C-MAC videolaryngoscopy with direct laryngoscopy for intubation in simulated cervical spine immobilization conditions. METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective randomized crossover manikin trial. 70 paramedics with <5years of medical experience participated in the study. The paramedics attempted to intubate manikins in 3 airway scenarios: normal airway without cervical immobilization (Scenario A); manual inline cervical immobilization (Scenario B); cervical immobilization using cervical extraction collar (Scenario C). RESULTS: Scenario A: Nearly all participants performed successful intubations with both MAC and C-MAC on the first attempt (95.7% MAC vs. 100% C-MAC), with similar intubation times (16.5s MAC vs. 18s C-MAC). Scenario B: The results with C-MAC were significantly better than those with MAC (p<0.05) for the time of intubation (23 s MAC vs. 19 s C-MAC), success of the first intubation attempt (88.6% MAC vs. 100% C-MAC), Cormack-Lehane grade, POGO score, severity of dental compression, device difficulty score, and preferred airway device. Scenario C: The results with C-MAC were significantly better than those with MAC (p<0.05) for all the analysed variables: success of the first attempt (51.4% MAC vs. 100% C-MAC), overall success rate, intubation time (27 s MAC vs. 20.5 s C-MAC), Cormack-Lehane grade, POGO score, dental compression, device difficulty score and the preferred airway device. CONCLUSION: The C-MAC videolaryngoscope is an excellent alternative to the MAC laryngoscope for intubating manikins with cervical spine immobilization.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Endotracheal intubation · Paramedics & EMTs · Video laryngoscopy
Related articles
- Comparison of the McGrath MAC EMS Videolaryngoscope with a Conventional Laryngoscope for Standard and Difficult Airway Intubation: A Randomized, Cross-over, Simulation Trial (Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2019)
- A comparison of McGrath MAC® and standard direct laryngoscopy in simulated immobilized cervical spine pediatric intubation: a manikin study. (Eur J Pediatr, 2017)
- Comparison of Airway Management Methods in Entrapped Patients: A Manikin Study. (Prehosp Emerg Care, 2016)
- Child endotracheal intubation with a Clarus Levitan fiberoptic stylet vs Macintosh laryngoscope during resuscitation performed by paramedics: a randomized crossover manikin trial. (Am J Emerg Med, 2015)
- Impact of VieScope® on first-attempt success during simulated COVID-19 patients intubation: A randomized cross-over simulation trial. (Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg, 2023)
- A comparison of tracheal intubation using intubrite laryngoscope and conventional MAC laryngoscope: An open, prospective, crossover manikin study. (Medicine (Baltimore), 2023)