4.7 Review

Tracheal Intubation during Advanced Life Support Using Direct Laryngoscopy versus Glidescope (R) Videolaryngoscopy by Clinicians with Limited Intubation Experience: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 11, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11216291

关键词

airway management; cardiopulmonary resuscitation; advanced life support; emergency medical service; tracheal intubation; videolaryngoscopy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy in clinicians with limited intubation experience, showing that Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscopy had a higher first-pass success rate and shorter time to successful intubation, as well as reduced chest compression interruption duration.
The use of the Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscope might improve tracheal intubation performance in clinicians with limited intubation experience, especially during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare direct laryngoscopy to Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscopy by these clinicians. PubMed/Medline and Embase were searched from their inception to 7 July 2020 for randomized controlled trials, including simulation studies. Studies on adult patients or adult-sized manikins were included when direct laryngoscopy was compared to Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscopy by clinicians with limited experience in tracheal intubation (<10 intubations per year). The primary outcome was the intubation first-pass success rate. Secondary outcomes were time to successful intubation and chest compression interruption duration during intubation. The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). We included 4 clinical trials with 525 patients and 20 manikin trials with 2547 intubations. Meta-analyses favored Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscopy over direct laryngoscopy regarding first-pass success (clinical trials: risk ratio [RR] = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-2.23; manikin trials: RR = 1.17; 95% CI: 1.09-1.25). Clinical trials showed a shorter time to achieve successful intubation when using the Glidescope (R) (mean difference = 17.04 s; 95% CI: 8.51-25.57 s). Chest compression interruption duration was decreased when using the Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscope. The certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. When clinicians with limited intubation experience have to perform tracheal intubation during advanced life support, the use of the Glidescope (R) videolaryngoscope improves intubation and CPR performance compared to direct laryngoscopy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据