Comparison of ease of intubation between GlideScope® and C-MAC® Videolaryngoscopes for novices

Badariah Yatim, Masdar Azlina, Aliza Mohamad Yusof, Tang Suet Ping Shereen, Nurlia Yahya, Muhammad Maaya

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: In recent years, video laryngoscopes, like GlideScope® and C-MAC®, have emerged as essential tools in the management of unanticipated difficult or failed laryngoscopic intubation. The ease of directing and inserting the endotracheal tube through the vocal cord has improved significantly when intubating with such devices. This prospective, randomised, single blinded clinical trial compared the ease of intubation between GlideScope® and C-MAC® videolaryngoscopes for novices. Materials and Methods: A total of 56 American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation under general anaesthesia, without any features suggestive of difficult intubation, were randomly allocated to either the GlideScope® Group (n=28) or C-MAC® Group (n=28). Following induction of anaesthesia with intravenous fentanyl, propofol and either rocuronium or atracurium, endotracheal intubation was carried out by junior anaesthesiology trainees using either one of the two videolaryngoscopes. The following parameters were recorded: the success of intubation at first attempt, the intubation time for successful first attempt and the number of optimisation manoeuvres required. Results: More novices in the GlideScope® Group (14.3%) required more than one intubation attempts and optimisation manoeuvres compared to those in the C-MAC® Group. The intubation time for successful first attempt was significantly longer in the GlideScope® Group compared to the C-MAC® Group (median 51.0 vs 37.0 seconds). Conclusion: CMAC ® videolaryngoscope significantly provided ease of intubation for novices compared to GlideScope® videolaryngoscope in patients without any features suggestive of difficult intubation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)139-146
Number of pages8
JournalBrunei International Medical Journal
Volume11
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Intubation
Intratracheal Intubation
Atracurium
Laryngoscopes
Intravenous Anesthesia
Anesthesiology
Vocal Cords
Fentanyl
Propofol
General Anesthesia
Clinical Trials
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Airway management
  • Endotracheal intubation
  • General anaesthesia
  • Videolaryngoscope

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

@article{8b4493f02ce94ee29877066102bce466,
title = "Comparison of ease of intubation between GlideScope{\circledR} and C-MAC{\circledR} Videolaryngoscopes for novices",
abstract = "Introduction: In recent years, video laryngoscopes, like GlideScope{\circledR} and C-MAC{\circledR}, have emerged as essential tools in the management of unanticipated difficult or failed laryngoscopic intubation. The ease of directing and inserting the endotracheal tube through the vocal cord has improved significantly when intubating with such devices. This prospective, randomised, single blinded clinical trial compared the ease of intubation between GlideScope{\circledR} and C-MAC{\circledR} videolaryngoscopes for novices. Materials and Methods: A total of 56 American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation under general anaesthesia, without any features suggestive of difficult intubation, were randomly allocated to either the GlideScope{\circledR} Group (n=28) or C-MAC{\circledR} Group (n=28). Following induction of anaesthesia with intravenous fentanyl, propofol and either rocuronium or atracurium, endotracheal intubation was carried out by junior anaesthesiology trainees using either one of the two videolaryngoscopes. The following parameters were recorded: the success of intubation at first attempt, the intubation time for successful first attempt and the number of optimisation manoeuvres required. Results: More novices in the GlideScope{\circledR} Group (14.3{\%}) required more than one intubation attempts and optimisation manoeuvres compared to those in the C-MAC{\circledR} Group. The intubation time for successful first attempt was significantly longer in the GlideScope{\circledR} Group compared to the C-MAC{\circledR} Group (median 51.0 vs 37.0 seconds). Conclusion: CMAC {\circledR} videolaryngoscope significantly provided ease of intubation for novices compared to GlideScope{\circledR} videolaryngoscope in patients without any features suggestive of difficult intubation.",
keywords = "Airway management, Endotracheal intubation, General anaesthesia, Videolaryngoscope",
author = "Badariah Yatim and Masdar Azlina and {Mohamad Yusof}, Aliza and Shereen, {Tang Suet Ping} and Nurlia Yahya and Muhammad Maaya",
year = "2015",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "139--146",
journal = "Brunei International Medical Journal",
issn = "1560-5876",
publisher = "Ministry of Health and Universiti Brunei Darussalem",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of ease of intubation between GlideScope® and C-MAC® Videolaryngoscopes for novices

AU - Yatim, Badariah

AU - Azlina, Masdar

AU - Mohamad Yusof, Aliza

AU - Shereen, Tang Suet Ping

AU - Yahya, Nurlia

AU - Maaya, Muhammad

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Introduction: In recent years, video laryngoscopes, like GlideScope® and C-MAC®, have emerged as essential tools in the management of unanticipated difficult or failed laryngoscopic intubation. The ease of directing and inserting the endotracheal tube through the vocal cord has improved significantly when intubating with such devices. This prospective, randomised, single blinded clinical trial compared the ease of intubation between GlideScope® and C-MAC® videolaryngoscopes for novices. Materials and Methods: A total of 56 American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation under general anaesthesia, without any features suggestive of difficult intubation, were randomly allocated to either the GlideScope® Group (n=28) or C-MAC® Group (n=28). Following induction of anaesthesia with intravenous fentanyl, propofol and either rocuronium or atracurium, endotracheal intubation was carried out by junior anaesthesiology trainees using either one of the two videolaryngoscopes. The following parameters were recorded: the success of intubation at first attempt, the intubation time for successful first attempt and the number of optimisation manoeuvres required. Results: More novices in the GlideScope® Group (14.3%) required more than one intubation attempts and optimisation manoeuvres compared to those in the C-MAC® Group. The intubation time for successful first attempt was significantly longer in the GlideScope® Group compared to the C-MAC® Group (median 51.0 vs 37.0 seconds). Conclusion: CMAC ® videolaryngoscope significantly provided ease of intubation for novices compared to GlideScope® videolaryngoscope in patients without any features suggestive of difficult intubation.

AB - Introduction: In recent years, video laryngoscopes, like GlideScope® and C-MAC®, have emerged as essential tools in the management of unanticipated difficult or failed laryngoscopic intubation. The ease of directing and inserting the endotracheal tube through the vocal cord has improved significantly when intubating with such devices. This prospective, randomised, single blinded clinical trial compared the ease of intubation between GlideScope® and C-MAC® videolaryngoscopes for novices. Materials and Methods: A total of 56 American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation under general anaesthesia, without any features suggestive of difficult intubation, were randomly allocated to either the GlideScope® Group (n=28) or C-MAC® Group (n=28). Following induction of anaesthesia with intravenous fentanyl, propofol and either rocuronium or atracurium, endotracheal intubation was carried out by junior anaesthesiology trainees using either one of the two videolaryngoscopes. The following parameters were recorded: the success of intubation at first attempt, the intubation time for successful first attempt and the number of optimisation manoeuvres required. Results: More novices in the GlideScope® Group (14.3%) required more than one intubation attempts and optimisation manoeuvres compared to those in the C-MAC® Group. The intubation time for successful first attempt was significantly longer in the GlideScope® Group compared to the C-MAC® Group (median 51.0 vs 37.0 seconds). Conclusion: CMAC ® videolaryngoscope significantly provided ease of intubation for novices compared to GlideScope® videolaryngoscope in patients without any features suggestive of difficult intubation.

KW - Airway management

KW - Endotracheal intubation

KW - General anaesthesia

KW - Videolaryngoscope

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945255945&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84945255945&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84945255945

VL - 11

SP - 139

EP - 146

JO - Brunei International Medical Journal

JF - Brunei International Medical Journal

SN - 1560-5876

IS - 3

ER -