...
首页> 外文期刊>Prehospital emergency care >Comparison of bougie-assisted intubation with traditional endotracheal intubation in a simulated difficult airway.
【24h】

Comparison of bougie-assisted intubation with traditional endotracheal intubation in a simulated difficult airway.

机译:在困难的模拟气道中,将布吉气管插管与传统气管插管进行比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare the success and ease of bougie-assisted intubation (BAI) with those of traditional endotracheal intubation (ETI) in a simulated difficult airway (20.4 seconds for BAI vs. 16.7 seconds for ETI, p = 0.102). METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-blind study comparing BAI with ETI in a simulated difficult airway. The 35 participants included paramedics, flight nurses, and emergency medicine resident physicians. Participants were already experienced in ETI and received a brief demonstration of BAI. A simulated difficult airway was created using a Laerdal adult intubation manikin. Cervical motion was mechanically limited to provide a grade III Cormack and Lehane glottic view. Participants performed ETI and BAI in randomized order. Successful placement in the trachea and time to successful placement were recorded for both techniques by each participant. After intubating the manikin with both techniques, each participant was asked to complete a Likert-style survey assessing ease of each technique. RESULTS: Of the 35 participants, 27 were successful with both techniques and two failed with both techniques. The remaining six participants all failed at ETI but were able to intubate using BAI. There was significantly greater success in intubating the simulated difficult airway with BAI than with ETI (94% vs. 77%, p = 0.0313). The order of techniques attempted did not influence this conclusion. There was no difference in average time to successful intubation (20.4 seconds for BAI vs. 16.7 seconds for ETI, p = 0.102). Thirty-two (91.4%) of the participants completed the survey regarding ease of performing each technique. Forty-one percent rated the ease of intubation as the same for the two methods, 50% rated BAI as easier, and 9% rated ETI as easier (p = 0.0006). CONCLUSION: In a simulated difficult airway, BAI has a higher success rate than traditional ETI without increasing the time to successful intubation. Intubators perceive BAI as being easier to perform than traditional ETI in this simulated difficult airway scenario.
机译:目的:在模拟的困难气道中比较弹弓辅助插管(BAI)与传统气管插管(ETI)的成功率和简便性(BAI为20.4秒,而ETI为16.7秒,p = 0.102)。方法:这是一项前瞻性,随机,交叉,单盲研究,在模拟的困难气道中比较了BAI和ETI。 35名参与者包括护理人员,飞行护士和急诊科住院医师。参与者已经具有ETI的经验,并获得了BAI的简短演示。使用Laerdal成人插管人体模型创建了模拟的困难气道。颈椎运动受到机械限制,无法提供III级Cormack和Lehane声门视野。参与者以随机顺序进行ETI和BAI。每个参与者都记录了两种技术在气管中的成功放置以及成功放置的时间。在将两种技术插入人体模型后,要求每个参与者完成一次李克特式调查,以评估每种技术的易用性。结果:在35名参与者中,有27名在两种技术上均成功,而两种在两种技术上均失败。其余六名参与者在ETI均失败,但能够使用BAI插管。与ETI相比,BAI气管插管模拟困难气道的成功率更高(94%比77%,p = 0.0313)。尝试的技术顺序不会影响此结论。成功插管的平均时间没有差异(BAI为20.4秒,ETI为16.7秒,p = 0.102)。三十二名(91.4%)的参与者完成了有关执行每种技术的难易程度的调查。有41%的人将插管的难易程度与两种方法相同,有50%的人认为BAI更容易,有9%的人认为ETI更容易(p = 0.0006)。结论:在模拟困难气道中,BAI的成功率高于传统ETI,而不会增加成功插管的时间。在这种模拟的困难气道情况下,插管者认为BAI比传统ETI更容易执行。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号