Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A prospective, pragmatic non-inferiority study of emergency intubation success with the single-use i-view versus standard reusable video laryngoscope.
Schauer, Steven G; Long, Brit J; April, Michael D; Resnick-Ault, Daniel; Mendez, Jessica; Arana, Allyson A; Bastman, Jill J; Davis, William T; Maddry, Joseph K; Ginde, Adit A; Bebarta, Vikhyat S.
Afiliación
  • Schauer SG; US Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA.
  • Long BJ; Brooke Army Medical Center, JBSA, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA.
  • April MD; Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
  • Resnick-Ault D; Brooke Army Medical Center, JBSA, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA.
  • Mendez J; Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
  • Arana AA; 59th Medical Wing, JBSA Lackland, Texas, USA.
  • Bastman JJ; Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
  • Davis WT; 14th Field Hospital, Fort Stewart, Georgia, USA.
  • Maddry JK; University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
  • Ginde AA; US Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA.
  • Bebarta VS; 59th Medical Wing, JBSA Lackland, Texas, USA.
Transfusion ; 64 Suppl 2: S201-S209, 2024 May.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38545924
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Video laryngoscope (VL) technology improves first-pass success. The novel i-view VL device is inexpensive and disposable. We sought to determine the first-pass intubation success with the i-view VL device versus the standard reusable VL systems in routine use at each site.

METHODS:

We performed a prospective, pragmatic study at two major emergency departments (EDs) when VL was used. We rotated i-view versus reusable VL as the preferred device of the month based on an a priori schedule. An investigator-initiated interim analysis was performed. Our primary outcome was a first-pass success with a non-inferiority margin of 10% based on the per-protocol analysis.

RESULTS:

There were 93 intubations using the reusable VL devices and 81 intubations using the i-view. Our study was stopped early due to futility in reaching our predetermined non-inferiority margin. Operator and patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. The first-pass success rate for the i-view group was 69.1% compared to 84.3% for the reusable VL group. A non-inferiority analysis indicated that the difference (-15.1%) and corresponding 90% confidence limits (-25.3% to -5.0%) did not fall within the predetermined 10% non-inferiority margin.

CONCLUSIONS:

The i-view device failed to meet our predetermined non-inferiority margin when compared to the reusable VL systems with the study stopping early due to futility. Significant crossover occurred at the discretion of the intubating operator during the i-view month.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Laringoscopios / Intubación Intratraqueal Límite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Laringoscopios / Intubación Intratraqueal Límite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article