Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A Completed N=92 Randomized Supportive Care

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

Intubation; Difficult · Cervical Spine Injury
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02405390 ↗
Enrolled (actual)
92
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Jun 2017
Primary outcomePrimary: Head Motion - Extension or Flexion — 16.5; 17.7 degrees of extension

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.

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Head Motion - Extension or Flexion
16.5; 17.7
SECONDARY
Time for Intubation
25.8; 18.9

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. Informational only — not medical advice.

Back to search