Comparison of modified Mallampati test and thyromental height test for preoperative airway assessment: A prospective observational study

IF 0.2 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Ketan K Kataria, S. Chhatrapati, S. Bloria, Nidhi Singh, S. Paul, A. Luthra, Samira Vithani, S. Omar, VKrishna Narayanan Nayanar
{"title":"Comparison of modified Mallampati test and thyromental height test for preoperative airway assessment: A prospective observational study","authors":"Ketan K Kataria, S. Chhatrapati, S. Bloria, Nidhi Singh, S. Paul, A. Luthra, Samira Vithani, S. Omar, VKrishna Narayanan Nayanar","doi":"10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_112_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Prevision of a potentially difficult airway in the preoperative period is imperative. The available tools are evaluation of mouth opening, Mallampati test; atlanto-occipital extension; hyomental, thyromental, and sternomental distances; and upper lip bite test; thyromental height test (TMHT) is a new indicator. Aims: To compare the effectiveness of preoperative anaesthetic airway evaluation methods of TMHT and Modified mallampati test (MMT) to predict the difficulty in intubation. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was aimed to compare the effectiveness of preoperative anesthetic airway evaluation methods of TMHT and modified Mallampati test (MMT) to predict the difficulty in intubation. A total of 150 subjects were included in this study. MMT and TMHT were compared, and sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy were calculated. Results: On comparison, we found TMHT to be more sensitive (93.33%) than MMT (77.78%); both tests have high specificity (TMHT 91.43%; MMT 81.90%). Positive predictive value was 82.35% for TMHT and 64.81% for MMT. Similarly, negative predictive value was 96.97% for TMHT and 89.58% for MMT. Accuracy was 92.00% for TMHT and 80.66% for MMT. Conclusions: TMHT can predict difficult intubation better than MMT (high positive predictive value). However, both TMHT and MMT predict easy intubations effectively, their negative predictive values being high.","PeriodicalId":42359,"journal":{"name":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","volume":"22 1","pages":"47 - 52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_112_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Prevision of a potentially difficult airway in the preoperative period is imperative. The available tools are evaluation of mouth opening, Mallampati test; atlanto-occipital extension; hyomental, thyromental, and sternomental distances; and upper lip bite test; thyromental height test (TMHT) is a new indicator. Aims: To compare the effectiveness of preoperative anaesthetic airway evaluation methods of TMHT and Modified mallampati test (MMT) to predict the difficulty in intubation. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was aimed to compare the effectiveness of preoperative anesthetic airway evaluation methods of TMHT and modified Mallampati test (MMT) to predict the difficulty in intubation. A total of 150 subjects were included in this study. MMT and TMHT were compared, and sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy were calculated. Results: On comparison, we found TMHT to be more sensitive (93.33%) than MMT (77.78%); both tests have high specificity (TMHT 91.43%; MMT 81.90%). Positive predictive value was 82.35% for TMHT and 64.81% for MMT. Similarly, negative predictive value was 96.97% for TMHT and 89.58% for MMT. Accuracy was 92.00% for TMHT and 80.66% for MMT. Conclusions: TMHT can predict difficult intubation better than MMT (high positive predictive value). However, both TMHT and MMT predict easy intubations effectively, their negative predictive values being high.
改良Mallampati试验与甲状腺高度试验在术前气道评估中的比较:一项前瞻性观察研究
背景:术前预防潜在困难的气道是当务之急。可用的工具有开口评估、Mallampati测试;寰枕伸展;舌骨、甲状腺和胸骨网膜距离;上唇咬合试验;甲状腺高度测试(TMHT)是一项新的指标。目的:比较TMHT和改良mallampati试验(MMT)术前麻醉气道评估方法预测插管困难的有效性。材料和方法:一项前瞻性观察性研究旨在比较TMHT和改良Mallampati试验(MMT)术前麻醉气道评估方法预测插管困难的有效性。本研究共纳入150名受试者。比较MMT和TMHT,并计算其敏感性、特异性、预测值和准确性。结果:TMHT的敏感性(93.33%)高于MMT(77.78%);两种检测均具有较高的特异性(TMHT 91.43%,MMT 81.90%),TMHT阳性预测值为82.35%,MMT阳性预测值64.81%。同样,TMHT和MMT的阴性预测值分别为96.97%和89.58%。TMHT和MMT的准确度分别为92.00%和80.66%。结论:TMHT比MMT更能预测插管困难(阳性预测值高)。然而,TMHT和MMT都能有效地预测容易插管,其阴性预测值很高。
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
Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Indian Anaesthetists Forum ANESTHESIOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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