N/A
N=781
Comparison of Glottic Views and Intubation Times in the Supine and 25 Degree Back-up Positions
Elective Surgical Patients
Bottom Line
View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02934347 ↗Enrolled (actual)
781
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Mar 2017
Primary outcome: Primary: The Best Glottic View Obtained During Laryngoscopy — 186; 228; 163; 151 participants — p=>0.05
Study Design & Population
- Study type
- Observational
- Phase
- N/A
- Interventions
- 25 degree back-up position (Procedure)
- Age
- Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
- Sex
- All
- Sponsor
- Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board
- Primary completion
- Nov 2014
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY The Best Glottic View Obtained During Laryngoscopy |
186; 228; 163; 151; 23; 24 | >0.05 |
| SECONDARY The Number of Attempts at Both Laryngoscopy and Tracheal Intubation |
340; 371; 25; 27; 5; 3 | <0.01 sig |
| SECONDARY The Use of Ancillary Equipment |
58; 61; 3; 4; 308; 341 | >0.05 |
| SECONDARY The Time Between the Beginning of Laryngoscopy and Detection of Carbon Dioxide on the End-tidal Carbon Dioxide Monitor |
26; 21; 30; 27; 28; 24 | <0.05 sig |
Summary
Our hypothesis is that the view of the glottis may be improved by putting all patients requiring intubation in the ramped or back up position while maintaining the classic sniffing position.
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- Adult surgical patients who required intubation as part of their routine anaesthesia
Exclusion Criteria
- Patients less than 18 years old,
- Patients recognised to have difficult airways where an alternative method of intubation (e.g. fibre optic) was the method of choice,
- Patients undergoing emergency surgery where patient positioning and data collection might cause delay (e.g. exsanguinating patients) or where the supine position is not optimal (e.g. brisk bleeding into the upper airway),
- Patients requiring rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02934347). 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.