俯卧位紧急气道管理:基于人体模型的观察性模拟研究。

IF 2.8 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Wesley Rajaleelan, Eugene Tuyishime, Eric Plitman, Zoe Unger, Lakshmi Venkataraghavan, Michael Dinsmore
{"title":"俯卧位紧急气道管理:基于人体模型的观察性模拟研究。","authors":"Wesley Rajaleelan, Eugene Tuyishime, Eric Plitman, Zoe Unger, Lakshmi Venkataraghavan, Michael Dinsmore","doi":"10.1186/s41077-024-00285-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Accidental extubation during prone position can be a life-threatening emergency requiring rapid establishment of the airway. However, there is limited evidence of the best airway rescue method for this potentially catastrophic emergency. The aim of this study was to determine the most effective method to recover the airway in case of accidental extubation during prone positioning by comparing three techniques (supraglottic airway, video laryngoscopy, and fiber-optic bronchoscopy) in a simulated environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eleven anesthesiologists and 12 anesthesia fellows performed the simulated airway management using 3 different techniques on a mannequin positioned prone in head pins. Time required for definitive airway management and the success rates were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The success rates of airway rescue were 100% with the supraglottic airway device (SAD), 69.6% with the video laryngoscope (CMAC), and 91.3% with the FOB. The mean (SD) time to insertion was 18.1 (4.8) s for the supraglottic airway, 78.3 (32.0) s for the CMAC, and 57.3 (24.6) s for the FOB. There were significant differences in the time required for definitive airway management between the SAD and FOB (t = 5.79, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 25.92-52.38), the SAD and CMAC (t = 8.90, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 46.93-73.40), and the FOB and CMAC (t = 3.11, p = 0.003, 95% CI = 7.78-34.25).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this simulation-based study suggest that the SAD I-gel is the best technique to manage accidental extubation during prone position by establishing a temporary airway with excellent success rate and shorter procedure time. When comparing techniques for securing a definitive airway, the FOB was more successful than the CMAC.</p>","PeriodicalId":72108,"journal":{"name":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","volume":"9 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10998376/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emergency airway management in the prone position: an observational mannequin-based simulation study.\",\"authors\":\"Wesley Rajaleelan, Eugene Tuyishime, Eric Plitman, Zoe Unger, Lakshmi Venkataraghavan, Michael Dinsmore\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41077-024-00285-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Accidental extubation during prone position can be a life-threatening emergency requiring rapid establishment of the airway. However, there is limited evidence of the best airway rescue method for this potentially catastrophic emergency. The aim of this study was to determine the most effective method to recover the airway in case of accidental extubation during prone positioning by comparing three techniques (supraglottic airway, video laryngoscopy, and fiber-optic bronchoscopy) in a simulated environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eleven anesthesiologists and 12 anesthesia fellows performed the simulated airway management using 3 different techniques on a mannequin positioned prone in head pins. Time required for definitive airway management and the success rates were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The success rates of airway rescue were 100% with the supraglottic airway device (SAD), 69.6% with the video laryngoscope (CMAC), and 91.3% with the FOB. The mean (SD) time to insertion was 18.1 (4.8) s for the supraglottic airway, 78.3 (32.0) s for the CMAC, and 57.3 (24.6) s for the FOB. There were significant differences in the time required for definitive airway management between the SAD and FOB (t = 5.79, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 25.92-52.38), the SAD and CMAC (t = 8.90, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 46.93-73.40), and the FOB and CMAC (t = 3.11, p = 0.003, 95% CI = 7.78-34.25).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this simulation-based study suggest that the SAD I-gel is the best technique to manage accidental extubation during prone position by establishing a temporary airway with excellent success rate and shorter procedure time. When comparing techniques for securing a definitive airway, the FOB was more successful than the CMAC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72108,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in simulation (London, England)\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10998376/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in simulation (London, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-024-00285-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-024-00285-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介俯卧位时意外拔管可能是危及生命的紧急情况,需要迅速建立气道。然而,对于这种可能造成灾难的紧急情况,最佳气道抢救方法的证据却很有限。本研究旨在通过在模拟环境中比较三种技术(声门上气道、视频喉镜和纤维光学支气管镜),确定在俯卧位时意外拔管时恢复气道的最有效方法:方法:11 名麻醉医师和 12 名麻醉研究员使用 3 种不同的技术对俯卧头针模型进行模拟气道管理。对最终气道管理所需时间和成功率进行了测量:结果:使用声门上气道装置(SAD)的气道抢救成功率为 100%,使用视频喉镜(CMAC)的成功率为 69.6%,使用 FOB 的成功率为 91.3%。插入声门上气道所需的平均(标清)时间为 18.1 (4.8) 秒,CMAC 为 78.3 (32.0) 秒,FOB 为 57.3 (24.6) 秒。SAD 和 FOB 在确定性气道管理所需时间上存在明显差异(t = 5.79,p 结论:SAD 和 FOB 在确定性气道管理所需时间上存在明显差异:这项模拟研究的结果表明,SAD I-gel 是处理俯卧位意外拔管的最佳技术,它能建立临时气道,成功率极高,手术时间较短。在比较确保最终气道的技术时,FOB 比 CMAC 更为成功。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emergency airway management in the prone position: an observational mannequin-based simulation study.

Introduction: Accidental extubation during prone position can be a life-threatening emergency requiring rapid establishment of the airway. However, there is limited evidence of the best airway rescue method for this potentially catastrophic emergency. The aim of this study was to determine the most effective method to recover the airway in case of accidental extubation during prone positioning by comparing three techniques (supraglottic airway, video laryngoscopy, and fiber-optic bronchoscopy) in a simulated environment.

Methods: Eleven anesthesiologists and 12 anesthesia fellows performed the simulated airway management using 3 different techniques on a mannequin positioned prone in head pins. Time required for definitive airway management and the success rates were measured.

Results: The success rates of airway rescue were 100% with the supraglottic airway device (SAD), 69.6% with the video laryngoscope (CMAC), and 91.3% with the FOB. The mean (SD) time to insertion was 18.1 (4.8) s for the supraglottic airway, 78.3 (32.0) s for the CMAC, and 57.3 (24.6) s for the FOB. There were significant differences in the time required for definitive airway management between the SAD and FOB (t = 5.79, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 25.92-52.38), the SAD and CMAC (t = 8.90, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 46.93-73.40), and the FOB and CMAC (t = 3.11, p = 0.003, 95% CI = 7.78-34.25).

Conclusion: The results of this simulation-based study suggest that the SAD I-gel is the best technique to manage accidental extubation during prone position by establishing a temporary airway with excellent success rate and shorter procedure time. When comparing techniques for securing a definitive airway, the FOB was more successful than the CMAC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 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