The investigators plan to conduct a randomized trial comparing the intubation success rate and time of the King Vision Video Laryngoscope to the Glidescope video laryngoscope in order to demonstrate the comparability of the devices.
Both the King Vision and Glidescope video laryngoscopes are advanced airway devices that are relatively low cost and are designed to improve the efficiency of both routine and difficult intubation. Both systems use disposable blades, which eliminates the need for blade sterilization and may minimize the risk of infectious exposure to patients and improve cost and efficiency associated with the sterilization processing of non-disposable laryngoscopes. The Glidescope has been commercially available longer than the King Vision, and has been more frequently studied. Although similar in many respects, the King Vision and Glidescope systems have differing designs which may result in differences in speed and success in the management of routine and/or difficult airways.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
40
Intubation via King Vision Video Laryngoscope
Intubation via Glidescope Video Laryngoscope
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Nashville, Tennessee, United States
Time Until Intubation With Each Device
time from the introduction of the laryngoscope into the oral cavity to endotracheal tube reaching the glottic aperture
Time frame: <100 seconds
Mean Pulse Oximetry Saturation Value Reading During Intubation
Time frame: <100 seconds
Total Number of Assisted Maneuvers Required to Complete Intubation (Includes All Participants in Arm)
Assisted Maneuvers can include laryngeal manipulation, head lift, Backward Upward Rightward Pressure, stylet removed, Cricoid pressure, scope manipulation and bougie.
Time frame: <100 seconds
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.