A comparison of the airway scope® and McCoy laryngoscope in patients with simulated restricted neck mobility

23Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We compared the efficacy of the Airway Scope® and McCoy laryngoscope as intubation tools with the neck stabilised by a rigid cervical collar. After induction of anaesthesia and neck stabilisation, 100 patients were randomly assigned to tracheal intubation with an Airway Scope or McCoy laryngoscope. Overall intubation success rate, time required for intubation, number of intubation attempts required for successful intubation, and airway complications related to intubation were recorded. Overall intubation success rates were 100% with both devices and a similar number of intubation attempts were required. However, the mean (SD) time required for successful intubation was shorter with the Airway Scope (30 (7) s) than with the McCoy laryngoscope (40 (14) s; p < 0.0001). The incidences of intubation complications were similar, but oesophageal intubation (in six cases) occurred only with McCoy laryngoscope. © 2010 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Komatsu, R., Kamata, K., Sessler, D. I., & Ozaki, M. (2010). A comparison of the airway scope® and McCoy laryngoscope in patients with simulated restricted neck mobility. Anaesthesia, 65(6), 564–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06334.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free