Randomized controlled trial assessing intubation time with and without an aerosol biocontainment device

Michael A. Kohanski, Heather Ungerer, Katherine Xu, J. Douglas, R. Carey, Christopher Rassekh, T. Chao, Mitchell L. Weinstein, J. Atkins
{"title":"Randomized controlled trial assessing intubation time with and without an aerosol biocontainment device","authors":"Michael A. Kohanski, Heather Ungerer, Katherine Xu, J. Douglas, R. Carey, Christopher Rassekh, T. Chao, Mitchell L. Weinstein, J. Atkins","doi":"10.1097/HN9.0000000000000043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic renewed interest in infectious aerosols and methods to reduce risk of airborne respiratory pathogen transmission. This has led to the development of novel aerosol protective devices for which clinical and aerosol protective features have not been fully characterized. The relative efficacy of these devices for use during airway procedures has not been assessed in randomized controlled trials. Materials and Methods: We recruited anesthesiology attendings, residents, and certified registered nurse anesthetists to perform intubations with an aerosol biocontainment device (ABCD). Thirty-seven patients undergoing procedures requiring intubation in the operating room were recruited and randomized (2:1) to intubation with (25) or without (12) the ABCD. Primary endpoints were time to secure the airway and adverse events. Secondary endpoints were a number of intubation attempts, access to the patient and airway equipment through the device ports, user assessment of ABCD function and technical burden, and patient experience in the ABCD. Results: Intubation time with the ABCD (46 s) was not significantly different compared to intubation without the ABCD (37 s; P=0.06). There were 3 adverse events with the ABCD (1 claustrophobia, 2 unanticipated difficult airways) that required device removal for intubation. In general, patients tolerated the device well and ABCD users felt the device functioned as intended but increased the technical burden associated with intubation. Discussion: It is feasible to use an aerosol protective device for intubation. The introduction of novel devices into high acuity airway procedures should be approached with caution and should account for the risk mitigation gained from the device balanced against the increased procedural complexity and potential safety risks associated with restricted access to the airway.","PeriodicalId":404380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Head & Neck Anesthesia","volume":"147 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Head & Neck Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HN9.0000000000000043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic renewed interest in infectious aerosols and methods to reduce risk of airborne respiratory pathogen transmission. This has led to the development of novel aerosol protective devices for which clinical and aerosol protective features have not been fully characterized. The relative efficacy of these devices for use during airway procedures has not been assessed in randomized controlled trials. Materials and Methods: We recruited anesthesiology attendings, residents, and certified registered nurse anesthetists to perform intubations with an aerosol biocontainment device (ABCD). Thirty-seven patients undergoing procedures requiring intubation in the operating room were recruited and randomized (2:1) to intubation with (25) or without (12) the ABCD. Primary endpoints were time to secure the airway and adverse events. Secondary endpoints were a number of intubation attempts, access to the patient and airway equipment through the device ports, user assessment of ABCD function and technical burden, and patient experience in the ABCD. Results: Intubation time with the ABCD (46 s) was not significantly different compared to intubation without the ABCD (37 s; P=0.06). There were 3 adverse events with the ABCD (1 claustrophobia, 2 unanticipated difficult airways) that required device removal for intubation. In general, patients tolerated the device well and ABCD users felt the device functioned as intended but increased the technical burden associated with intubation. Discussion: It is feasible to use an aerosol protective device for intubation. The introduction of novel devices into high acuity airway procedures should be approached with caution and should account for the risk mitigation gained from the device balanced against the increased procedural complexity and potential safety risks associated with restricted access to the airway.
随机对照试验评估使用和不使用气溶胶生物防护装置的插管时间
导语:2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行的出现重新引起了人们对传染性气溶胶和降低空气传播呼吸道病原体风险的方法的兴趣。这导致了新型气溶胶防护装置的发展,其临床和气溶胶防护功能尚未得到充分表征。这些设备在气道手术中使用的相对疗效尚未在随机对照试验中进行评估。材料和方法:我们招募麻醉科主治医师、住院医师和注册麻醉师护士,使用气溶胶生物防护装置(ABCD)进行插管。招募了37名需要在手术室插管的患者,并随机(2:1)分为有(25)或没有(12)ABCD的两组。主要终点是确保气道安全的时间和不良事件。次要终点是多次插管尝试、通过设备端口进入患者和气道设备、用户对ABCD功能和技术负担的评估,以及患者在ABCD中的体验。结果:有ABCD的插管时间(46 s)与无ABCD的插管时间(37 s;P = 0.06)。有3例ABCD不良事件(1例幽闭恐惧症,2例意外气道困难)需要取出设备进行插管。一般来说,患者对该装置耐受良好,ABCD使用者感觉该装置功能正常,但增加了与插管相关的技术负担。讨论:气管插管使用气溶胶防护装置是可行的。在高锐气道手术中引入新设备时应谨慎对待,并应考虑到设备带来的风险缓解与增加的程序复杂性和与气道受限相关的潜在安全风险之间的平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信