Gum-Elastic Bougie Efficacy for Tracheal Intubation During Continuous Chest Compression in Infants-A Crossover Simulation Trial

Efficacy of bougie first approach for endotracheal intubation with video laryngoscopy during continuous chest compression: a randomized crossover manikin trial

BACKGROUND

Endotracheal intubation is challenging during cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and video laryngoscopy has showed benefits for this procedure. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of various intubation approaches, including the bougie first, preloaded bougie, endotracheal tube (ETT) with stylet, and ETT without stylet, on first-attempt success using video laryngoscopy during chest compression.

METHODS

This was a randomized crossover trial conducted in a general tertiary teaching hospital. We included anesthesia residents in postgraduate year one to three who passed the screening test. Each resident performed intubation with video laryngoscopy using the four approaches in a randomized sequence on an adult manikin during continuous chest compression. The primary outcome was the first-attempt success defined as starting ventilation within a one minute.

RESULTS

A total of 260 endotracheal intubations conducted by 65 residents were randomized and analyzed with 65 procedures in each group. First-attempt success occurred in 64 (98.5%), 57 (87.7%), 56 (86.2%), and 46 (70.8%) intubations in the bougie-first, preloaded bougie, ETT with stylet, and ETT without stylet approaches, respectively. The bougie-first approach had a significantly higher possibility of first-attempt success than the preloaded bougie approach [risk ratio (RR) 8.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 62.16, P = 0.047], the ETT with stylet approach (RR 9.00, 95% CI 1.17 to 69.02, P = 0.035), and the ETT without stylet approach (RR 19.00, 95% CI 2.62 to 137.79, P = 0.004) in the generalized estimating equation logistic model accounting for clustering of intubations operated by the same resident. In addition, the bougie first approach did not result in prolonged intubation or increased self-reported difficulty among the study participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The bougie first approach with video laryngoscopy had the highest possibility of first-attempt success during chest compression. These results helped inform the intubation approach during CPR. However, further studies in an actual clinical environment are warranted to validate these findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT05689125; date: January 18, 2023.

The Pediatric Rigid Stylet Improves First-Pass Success Compared With the Standard Malleable Stylet and Tracheal Tube Introducer in a Simulated Pediatric Emergency Intubation

BACKGROUND

Pediatric emergency intubation is a high-acuity, low-occurrence procedure. Despite advances in technology, the success of this procedure remains low and adverse events are very high. Prospective observational studies in children have demonstrated improved success with the use of video laryngoscopy (VL) compared with direct laryngoscopy, although reported first-pass success (FPS) rates are lower than that reported for adults. This may in part be due to difficulty directing the tracheal tube to the laryngeal inlet considering the cephalad position of the larynx in infants. Using airway adjuncts such as the pediatric rigid stylet (PRS) or a tracheal tube introducer (TTI) may aid with intubation to the cephalad positioned airway when performing VL. The objectives of this study were to assess the FPS and time to intubation when intubating an infant manikin with a standard malleable stylet (SMS) compared with a PRS and TTI.

METHODS

This was a randomized cross-over study performed at an academic institution both with emergency medicine (EM) and combined pediatric and EM (EM&PEDS) residency programs. Emergency medicine and EM&PEDS residents were recruited to participate. Each resident performed intubations on a 6-month-old infant simulator using a standard geometry C-MAC Miller 1 video laryngoscope and 3 different intubation adjuncts (SMS, PRS, TTI) in a randomized fashion. All sessions were video recorded for data analysis. The primary outcome was FPS using the 3 different intubation adjuncts. The secondary outcome was the mean time to intubation (in seconds) for each adjunct.

RESULTS

Fifty-one participants performed 227 intubations. First-pass success with the SMS was 73% (37/51), FPS was 94% (48/51) with the PRS, and 29% (15/51) with the TTI. First-pass success was lower with the SMS (-43%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -63% to -23%; P < 0.01) and significantly lower with the TTI compared with PRS (difference -65%; 95% CI, -81% to -49%; P < 0.01). First-pass success while using the PRS was higher than SMS (difference 22%, 7% to 36%; P < 0.01). The mean time to intubation using the SMS was 44 ± 13 seconds, the PRS was 38 ± 11 seconds, and TTI was 59 ± 15 seconds. The mean time to intubation was higher with SMS (difference 15 seconds; 95% CI, 10 to 20 seconds; P < 0.01) and significantly higher with the TTI compared with PRS (difference 21 seconds; 95% CI, 17 to 26 seconds; P < 0.01). Time to intubation with the PRS was lower than SMS (difference -7 seconds; 95% CI, -11 to -2 seconds; P < 0.01). The ease of use was significantly higher for the PRS compared with the TTI when operators rated them on a visual analog scale (91 vs 20 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the PRS by EM and EM&PEDS residents on an infant simulator was associated with increased FPS and shorter time to intubation. Clinical studies are warranted comparing these intubation aids in children.

George J. A prospective randomised simulation trial comparing our novel AIR-BOX to standard airway equipment storage modalities

Background

There is little evidence guiding equipment handling during emergency endotracheal intubations (EEI). Available evidence and current practice are either outdated, anecdotal or focused on difficult-not emergency-intubation. In this study, we describe and evaluate our equipment handling unit: the AIR-BOX.

Methods

This is a proof-of-concept, prospective, randomised simulation trial. A convenience sample of 50 airway course participants voluntarily underwent randomisation: 21 to the AIR-BOX group, 14 to the intubation box group, and 15 to the crash cart group. The volunteers were asked to intubate a manikin using the equipment from the storage unit of their randomisation. Outcome measures included time-to-readiness, time-to-intubation, first-pass success, and subjective operator experience.

Results

The mean time-to-readiness was 67.2 s with the AIR-BOX, 84.6 s with the intubation box, and 115 s with the crash cart. The mean time-to-intubation was 105 s with the AIR-BOX, 127 s with the intubation box and 167 s with the crash cart. A statistically significant difference was achieved between the AIR-BOX and the crash cart. No statistically significant difference was found between the three groups with regard to first-pass success or the time between intubation readiness and intubation.

Conclusions

This study supports the AIR-BOX as a viable tool that can improve and simplify access to emergency intubating equipment. It also opens doors for multiple future innovations that can positively impact equipment handling practices. Future studies can focus on assessing whether applying the AIR-BOX will yield a clinically significant impact on patient outcomes.

Evaluation of gum-elastic bougie combined with direct and indirect laryngoscopes in vomitus setting: A randomized simulation trial

PURPOSE

Videolaryngoscopes may not be useful in the presence of vomitus due to blurred images on the monitor. The objective of our study is to compare the utility of gum-elastic bougie (GEB) application for tracheal intubation with the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL), which is a direct laryngoscope, with that of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope® (AWS) and McGRATH® MAC (McGRATH) in simulated vomitus settings.

METHODS

Sixteen novice doctors performed tracheal intubation on an adult manikin using McL, AWS, and McGRATH with or without GEB under normal and vomitus simulations.

RESULTS

In the normal setting the tracheal intubation was successful with the three laryngoscopes regardless of GEB application. In the vomitus setting, the intubation success rate did not significantly improve using McL, while it did using McGRATH or AWS. In the normal settings, GEB application significantly lengthened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. By contrast, in the vomitus settings, GEB application significantly shortened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. For the comparison of three laryngoscopes, the intubation time did not differ significantly in normal setting, while it was significantly longer in McG and AWS trials than McL trial.

CONCLUSION

The GEB application facilitates the tracheal intubation in the vomitus setting using McGRATH and AWS in adult simulation.