N/A N=92 Randomized Supportive Care

Head Motion in Pediatric Patients Endotracheally Intubated With Video Laryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopy

Intubation; Difficult · Cervical Spine Injury

Bottom Line

View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02405390 ↗

Enrolled (actual)

Serious AEs

0.0%

Results posted

Jun 2017

Primary outcome: Primary: Head Motion - Extension or Flexion — 16.5; 17.7 degrees of extension

Study Design & Population

Study type: Interventional
Phase: N/A
Interventions: Video Laryngoscopy (Procedure); Direct Laryngoscopy (Procedure); Storz C-Mac® laryngoscope (Device)
Age: Pediatric
Sex: All
Sponsor: Nicklaus Children's Hospital f/k/a Miami Children's Hospital
Primary completion: Jun 2015

Outcome Measures

Outcome	Result	p-value
PRIMARY Head Motion - Extension or Flexion	16.5; 17.7	—
SECONDARY Time for Intubation	25.8; 18.9	—

Summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate if intubation with video laryngoscopy (VL) will result in less head motion and therefore less cervical motion when compared with direct laryngoscopy (DL). The aim of the study is to determine the amount of head motion (extension, flexion and rotation) when using Storz C-Mac® video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopes. Secondarily, the study will also measure the number of attempts to properly intubate and the time required for intubation with either technique.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

patients being orally intubated in the Operating Room as per standard anesthesia procedures

Exclusion Criteria

previous history of cervical spine injury or surgery
craniofacial abnormalities
airway congenital abnormalities
airway prior to surgery

View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02405390). 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.