Video Versus Nonvideo in a Rabbit Training Model for Establishing an Emergency Front of Neck Airway in Children: A Prospective Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Simulating a realistic "cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate" (CICO) situation to train an "emergency front of neck airway" is difficult. It further remains unclear if provision of regular technical refreshers improves performance in the setting of a real CICO situation. The purpose of this prospective study on an established surgical rabbit cadaver tracheostomy model was to evaluate the benefit of viewing training material shortly before performing "emergency front of neck airway." METHODS: Previously trained participants were randomized into 2 groups. The control group (video) was allowed to watch an instructional video before performing a tracheotomy on the training model, while the study group (nonvideo) was not. Queried outcomes included success rate, performance time, and severe secondary airway injuries between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In 29 tracheotomies performed by 29 participants, the overall success rate was 86% (92% video; 81% nonvideo, P = 0.4). Performance time was not different between the 2 groups (video: 80 s [IQR25-75: 53-86], nonvideo 64 s [IQR25-75: 47-102]; P = 0.93). Only in the nonvideo group, the performance time and the time between the workshops correlated positively (P = 0.048). Severe secondary injuries were noted in 4 of 29 rabbit cadavers, 2 in each group. Watching a refresher video before performing an emergency surgical tracheostomy in an infant training model did not influence the success rate and the performance time in previously trained anesthetists. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the ease of learning, memorization, and recall of this emergency surgical tracheostomy technique and may demonstrate its applicability in a real infant CICO situation.

Cuffed versus uncuffed tracheal tubes in a rabbit training model for establishing an emergency front-of-neck airway in infants: a prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of evidence regarding the optimal type of tracheal tube to be advanced over a Frova catheter when performing a 'bougie' emergency front-of-neck airway (eFONA) technique in infants during a 'cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate' situation. METHODS: A prospective non-inferiority trial in a rabbit cadaver surgical tracheotomy model to assess the performance of the eFONA technique with an uncuffed 3.5 mm ID tracheal tube vs a cuffed 3.0 mm ID tracheal tube. Queried outcomes include success rate, performance time, and severe secondary airway injuries among tracheal tube types. RESULTS: In 60 tracheostomies performed by 30 participants, the overall success rate was 98%. Performance time was independent from tracheal tube choice (uncuffed: 61 s [95% confidence interval (CI), 52-76], cuffed: 64 s [95% CI, 55-79]; P = 0.82). No tracheal tube type was preferred in terms of usability by participants. The cuffed tracheal tube required increased force to be advanced over the Frova catheter and was associated with a risk ratio of 2.5 (95% CI, 0.53-11.9; number needed to harm, 10) for severe secondary airway injuries when compared with the uncuffed tracheal tube. CONCLUSION: In performing eFONA in the rabbit cadaver model, an ID 3.5 uncuffed is non-inferior to an ID 3.0 cuffed tracheal tube regarding performance time and preference by the operator. Greater force application to advance the cuffed tube over the Frova catheter and more severe airway injuries may argue for the standardised performance of the eFONA technique with a uncuffed tracheal tube in infants.

Rabbit training model for establishing an emergency front of neck airway in children.

BACKGROUND: A 'cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate' (CICO) situation is rare in paediatric anaesthesia, but can always occur in children under certain emergency situations. There is a paucity of literature on specific procedures for securing an emergency invasive airway in children younger than 6 yr. A modified emergency front of neck access (eFONA) technique using a rabbit cadaver model was developed to teach invasive airway protection in a CICO situation in children. METHODS: After watching an instructional video of our eFONA technique (tracheotomy, intubation with Frova catheter over which a tracheal tube is inserted), 29 anaesthesiologists performed two separate attempts on rabbit cadavers. The primary outcome was the success rate and the performance time overall and in subgroups of trained and untrained participants. RESULTS: The overall success rate across 58 tracheotomies was 95% and the median performance time was 67 s (95% confidence interval [CI], 56-76). Performance time decreased from the first to the second attempt from 72 s (95% CI, 57-81) to 61 s (95% CI, 50-81). Performance time was 59 s (95% CI, 49-79) for untrained participants and 72 s (95% CI, 62-81) for trained participants. Clinical experience and age of the participants was not correlated with performance time, whereas the length of the tracheotomy incision showed a significant correlation (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: This eFONA training model for children facilitates rapid skill acquisition under realistic anatomical conditions to perform an emergency invasive airway in children younger than 2 yr.