Comparison of neutral and sniffing position for ease of endotracheal intubation using Airtraq optical laryngoscope-A randomized trial.

IF 1.5 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Mamta Bhardwaj, Priya, Rashmi, Prashant Kumar, Kiranpreet Kaur, Sunny
{"title":"Comparison of neutral and sniffing position for ease of endotracheal intubation using Airtraq optical laryngoscope-A randomized trial.","authors":"Mamta Bhardwaj, Priya, Rashmi, Prashant Kumar, Kiranpreet Kaur, Sunny","doi":"10.4103/joacp.joacp_10_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Traditionally, the sniffing position has been considered a standard head and neck position during direct laryngoscopy. The perfect head and neck position for video laryngoscopy has yet not been described. Hence, we planned the present study to compare the neutral and sniffing position for ease of intubation using Airtraq.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 60 patients were randomized into two groups. Patients were intubated with their heads in neutral and sniffing positions in Group NP and SP, respectively. Ease of intubation was taken as a primary outcome. Laryngoscopy time, intubation time, percentage of glottic opening (POGO), the number of attempts for Airtraq and endotracheal tube, insertion of Airtraq, the success rate of intubation, optimization maneuvers, and complications were taken as secondary objectives. Data were analyzed using SPSS software, V.22.(1).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For ease of intubation, we used a visual analog scale (VAS) and Fremantle scores. VAS score (mm) in the median (interquartile range [IQR]) was 32 (24, 34) and 28 (24, 32) in NP and SP groups, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.37). Twenty-four (80%) patients in NP and 23 (76.67%) patients in the SP group had a Fremantle score of F1 (full view; easy intubation). One (3.33%) patient in both groups had a score of F2 (full view; modified intubation). Five (16.67%) and six (20%) patients in NP and SP groups had P1 scores. Overall, there was no difference in Fremantle's score between the groups (<i>P</i> = 0.945). The number of attempts, optimization maneuvers, and complications were statistically comparable between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is no difference in the ease of intubation between the neutral and sniffing position using the Airtraq optical laryngoscope.</p>","PeriodicalId":14946,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"40 4","pages":"598-604"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11694885/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_10_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Traditionally, the sniffing position has been considered a standard head and neck position during direct laryngoscopy. The perfect head and neck position for video laryngoscopy has yet not been described. Hence, we planned the present study to compare the neutral and sniffing position for ease of intubation using Airtraq.

Methods: A total of 60 patients were randomized into two groups. Patients were intubated with their heads in neutral and sniffing positions in Group NP and SP, respectively. Ease of intubation was taken as a primary outcome. Laryngoscopy time, intubation time, percentage of glottic opening (POGO), the number of attempts for Airtraq and endotracheal tube, insertion of Airtraq, the success rate of intubation, optimization maneuvers, and complications were taken as secondary objectives. Data were analyzed using SPSS software, V.22.(1).

Results: For ease of intubation, we used a visual analog scale (VAS) and Fremantle scores. VAS score (mm) in the median (interquartile range [IQR]) was 32 (24, 34) and 28 (24, 32) in NP and SP groups, respectively (P = 0.37). Twenty-four (80%) patients in NP and 23 (76.67%) patients in the SP group had a Fremantle score of F1 (full view; easy intubation). One (3.33%) patient in both groups had a score of F2 (full view; modified intubation). Five (16.67%) and six (20%) patients in NP and SP groups had P1 scores. Overall, there was no difference in Fremantle's score between the groups (P = 0.945). The number of attempts, optimization maneuvers, and complications were statistically comparable between the groups.

Conclusion: There is no difference in the ease of intubation between the neutral and sniffing position using the Airtraq optical laryngoscope.

Airtraq光学喉镜下中性位与嗅位对气管插管便利性的比较-一项随机试验。
背景:传统上,吸气体位被认为是直接喉镜检查时标准的头颈部体位。视频喉镜检查的完美头颈部位置尚未被描述。因此,我们计划在本研究中比较中立位和吸气位对使用Airtraq插管的易用性。方法:60例患者随机分为两组。NP组和SP组患者分别以中性位和嗅位插管。插管难易程度作为主要观察指标。以喉镜检查时间、插管时间、声门打开百分率(POGO)、Airtraq和气管插管尝试次数、Airtraq的插入、插管成功率、优化操作、并发症为次要目标。数据分析采用SPSS软件V.22.(1)。结果:为了方便插管,我们使用了视觉模拟量表(VAS)和Fremantle评分。NP组和SP组VAS评分(mm)中位数(四分位间距[IQR])分别为32(24、34)和28(24、32),差异有统计学意义(P = 0.37)。NP组24例(80%)患者和SP组23例(76.67%)患者的Fremantle评分为F1(全视图;容易插管)。两组均有1例(3.33%)患者评分为F2(全视图;修改插管)。NP组和SP组分别有5例(16.67%)和6例(20%)患者P1评分。总体而言,两组间Fremantle评分无差异(P = 0.945)。尝试次数、优化操作和并发症在组间具有统计学上的可比性。结论:使用Airtraq光学喉镜时,中性位与嗅位插管的便捷性无显著差异。
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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
129
期刊介绍: The JOACP publishes original peer-reviewed research and clinical work in all branches of anaesthesiology, pain, critical care and perioperative medicine including the application to basic sciences. In addition, the journal publishes review articles, special articles, brief communications/reports, case reports, and reports of new equipment, letters to editor, book reviews and obituaries. It is international in scope and comprehensive in coverage.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信