Comparison of UESCOPE VL 400, I-VIEW, Airtraq for Tracheal Intubation in Simulated Out-of-Hospital Conditions

July 13, 2023 updated by: Tomasz Gaszynski, Medical University of Lodz

Comparison of UESCOPE VL 400, I-VIEW, Airtraq Videolaryngoscopes and Macintosh Laryngoscope for Tracheal Intubation in Simulated Out-of-Hospital Conditions: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study

In the study, three videolaryngoscopes: UESCOPE VL 400 (Zhejiang UE Medical Corp. Zhejiang, China), I-View™ VL (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham, Berkshire, UK), Airtraq sp® (Prodol Meditec S.A, Vizcaya, Spain) were compared with the most widely used, classic Macintosh laryngoscope (HEINE Optotechnik GmbH & Co. KG, Gilch-ing, Germany) under simulated out-of-hospital conditions by people without clinical experience on a manikin model (Laerdal Airway Management Trainer Stavanger Norway manikin of universal difficulty), while using an endotracheal tube without and with a stylet. Simulated out-of-hospital conditions were created by placing the manikin at floor level. A random selection of 30 students of the third year of Emergency Medicine, full-time first-degree program at the Medical University of Lodz, Poland, were enrolled in the study. The following were assessed: intubation efficiency, time to ventilation (primary endpoints); intubation effort, intubator comfort, tooth damage and visibility of the glottis according to the Cormack-Lehane scale (secondary endpoints).

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Pre-study preparation All participants attended a 30-minute lecture on laryngoscope construction, principles of usage, anatomical structure of the airways, and intubation techniques. Following the lecture, the instructor demonstrated proper intubation using each of the four laryngoscopes that were being tested. Next, the students participated in a supervised workshop where they had the opportunity to intubate a mannequin placed on an operating table at an optimal height using each of the tested laryngoscopes with and without a stylet. One month later, 30 students participated in the actual study.

Simulation model To create simulated out-of-hospital conditions, a certified airway training manikin (Laerdal Airway Management Trainer Stavanger Norway of universal difficulty) was placed in a neutral position at floor level.

The trial tested three unchanneled videolaryngoscopes: UESCOPE VL 400 (Zhejiang UE Medical Corp. Zhejiang, China), I-View™ VL (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham, Berkshire, UK), Airtraq sp ® (Prodol Meditec S.A, Vizcaya, Spain), and a Macintosh laryngoscope (HEINE Optotechnik GmbH & Co. KG, Gilch-ing, Germany) (see Fig. 1).

Each participant performed eight intubations on the manikin using all four devices. The intubation order was randomized using a blocked randomization strategy generated by the Randomizer Program (randomizer.org). A sealed opaque envelope was used to determine the order in which the laryngoscopes were used, and whether the tube was with or without a stylet.

After each intubation, there was a minimum 10-minute pause before the next one. The subject then proceeded to the next intubation with the randomly selected laryngoscope, with the tube and stylet as determined by the sealed envelope.

All intubations were performed using a polyvinyl chloride cuffed endotracheal tube (Covidien LLC, Hampshire Street, Mansfield, USA; internal diameter 7.0 mm) and an endotracheal stylet (Sumi® from sp. z o.o., 35 Drobiarska Street, 05-070 Sulejówek, Poland), when used. The endotracheal tubes and stylets were coated with a standard lubricant for simulators. All data were pseudonymized for each simulation.

The time was measured by the same investigator (P.R.) using a stopwatch for all TI attempts. The timing measurement started when the participant picked up the laryngoscope and ended when initial ventilation was achieved using a resuscitation bag after the placement and sealing of the endotracheal tube. Successful TI was confirmed by observing the breathing movements of the manikin lungs. An unsuccessful attempt was defined by the absence of respiratory movements of the dummy or an intubation time of more than 60 seconds. This criterion was adopted because the study aimed to assess the suitability of the devices for individuals without clinical experience in intubation. Participants without sufficient skills or a good view of the glottis could prolong intubations without knowing how to solve the problem. In a real clinical scenario, such prolongation of intubation attempts beyond 60 seconds could result in irreversible brain damage in the victim, especially considering the necessary time for the emergency medical team to arrive.

Participants rated the level of effort required to perform TI using the modified Borg scale (0 - no effort, 10 - maximum effort) and graded their comfort during the procedure as "full comfort, satisfactory comfort, moderate comfort, unsatisfactory comfort, and no comfort."

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

30

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Łódź, Poland, 90-153
        • Medical University of Lodz, Poland

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

intubation effort, intubator comfort, tooth damage and visibility of the glottis according to the Cormack-Lehane scale

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • attaneding students

Exclusion Criteria:

  • lack of conscent to participate

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
students
30 students of the third year of Emergency Medicine, full-time first-degree program at the Medical University of Lodz, Poland, were enrolled in the study.
Evaluation of 3 videolaryngoscopes under simulated out-of-hospital conditions by people without clinical experience on a manikin model

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
time to ventilation
Time Frame: during the procedure
time from grabbing the laryngoscope to confirmed intubation measured in sec
during the procedure
intubation efficacy
Time Frame: during the procedure
endotracheal intubation confirmed by ventilation of manikin's lungs, measured yes/no
during the procedure

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
intubation effort
Time Frame: during the procedure
how many intubations are required to success, measured in number of attempts
during the procedure
intubator comfort,
Time Frame: during the procedure
operator's experience measured with Borg scale
during the procedure
tooth damage
Time Frame: during the procedure
tooth damage recorded by manikin sensors, measured yes/no
during the procedure
visibility of the glottis according to the Cormack-Lehane scale
Time Frame: during the procedure
visibility of glottis in Cormack-Lehane score assessed by operators, measured using Cormack-Lehane scale
during the procedure

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Tomasz Gaszynski, Prof, Medical University of Lodz, Poland

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

January 1, 2022

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 16, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 13, 2023

First Posted (Actual)

July 14, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

July 14, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 13, 2023

Last Verified

July 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • RNN/363/13/KB

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Training Group, Sensitivity

Clinical Trials on intubation in manikin

Subscribe