N/A
N=66
Comparison Study of the McGrath MAC Video Laryngoscope With the King Vision
Video Laryngoscopic Device Usage in Novice Users
Bottom Line
View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02316769 ↗Enrolled (actual)
66
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Aug 2016
Primary outcome: Primary: Intubation Success on First Attempt as Measured by End Tidal Carbon Dioxide — 24; 33 participants
Study Design & Population
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- N/A
- Interventions
- King Vision video laryngoscope (Procedure); McGrath MAC video laryngoscope (Procedure)
- Age
- Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
- Sex
- All
- Sponsor
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center
- Primary completion
- May 2013
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Intubation Success on First Attempt as Measured by End Tidal Carbon Dioxide |
24; 33 | — |
| SECONDARY Time to Intubation |
10; 25 | — |
Summary
In this study, the investigators compare the effectiveness of two relatively new video laryngoscopes, McGrath MAC (Covidien, Dublin Ireland) and the King Vision (King Systems, Noblesville, IN), by practitioners experienced in airway management but with limited exposure to these two devices. Our hypothesis was that, the McGrath MAC device would require fewer intubation attempts and shorter intubation times than the King Vision when performed by novice users.
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- All interested airway providers (Residents, Attendings, Certified Nurse Anesthetist and
- Student Registered Nurse Anesthetist) will be eligible to be included. -
Exclusion Criteria
- All patients with difficult airways as determined by history or physical exam (limited oral opening, limited cervical extension, receding chin, Mallampati class III or IV).
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02316769). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.