ArticleAnnals of emergency medicine2012
A comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope to the Macintosh direct laryngoscope for intubation in the emergency department.
Article in Annals of emergency medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02208349 (King Video Laryngoscope Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Prehospital Intubation), which is not on this map. Cited by 57 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
King Video Laryngoscope Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Prehospital Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
57 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 187 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of adverse events between video and direct laryngoscopes for tracheal intubations in emergency department and ICU patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2020Pooled it
- [Systematic analysis of airway registries in emergency medicine].Der Anaesthesist · 2018Pooled it
- Video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for orotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Intensive care medicine · 2014Pooled it
- Comparison of AirAngel® vs. Storz® videolaryngoscope and Macintosh® laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation training: prospective randomized crossover study.BMC medical education · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Improved success rates using videolaryngoscopy in unexperienced users: a randomized crossover study in airway manikins.European journal of medical research · 2017Trial
- [Out-of-hospital airway management in trauma patients : Experiences with the C-MAC® video laryngoscope].Der Unfallchirurg · 2016Trial
- Comparing McGRATH® MAC, C-MAC®, and Macintosh Laryngoscopes Operated by Medical Students: A Randomized, Crossover, Manikin Study.BioMed research international · 2016Trial
- The C-MAC videolaryngoscope compared with conventional laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation at the emergency department: study protocol.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2015Trial
- Clinical evaluation of C-MAC videolaryngoscope with or without use of stylet for endotracheal intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilization.Journal of anesthesia · 2013Trial
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Awake Tracheal Intubation Is Associated with Fewer Adverse Events in Critical Care Patients than Anaesthetised Tracheal Intubation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Comparing Direct and Video Laryngoscopy Skills Between Resident and Attending Emergency Physicians.The Permanente journal · 2023Article
- Airway registries in primarily adult, emergent endotracheal intubation: a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Article
- A prospective observational study of video laryngoscopy-guided coaching in the pediatric intensive care unit.Paediatric anaesthesia · 2022Observational
- Direct vs Video Laryngoscopy for Difficult Airway Patients in the Emergency Department: A National Emergency Airway Registry Study.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison of C-MAC and McGrathMAC Videolaryngoscopes for Intubation in Patients with Normal Airway by Donned Anaesthesiologists Using an Intubation Box During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective, Randomized Study.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2022Article
- Video screen visualization patterns when using a video laryngoscope for tracheal intubation: A systematic review.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on byIn reply.2013
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveWe determine the proportion of successful intubations with the C-MAC video laryngoscope (C-MAC) compared with the direct laryngoscope in emergency department (ED) intubations.
methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data entered into a continuous quality improvement database during a 28-month period in an academic ED. After each intubation, the operator completed a standardized data form evaluating multiple aspects of the intubation, including patient demographics, indication for intubation, device(s) used, reason for device selection, difficult airway characteristics, number of attempts, and outcome of each attempt. Intubation was considered ultimately successful if the endotracheal tube was correctly inserted into the trachea with the initial device. An attempt was defined as insertion of the device into the mouth regardless of whether there was an attempt to pass the tube. The primary outcome measure was ultimate success. Secondary outcome measures were first-attempt success, Cormack-Lehane view, and esophageal intubation. Multivariate logistic regression analyses, with the inclusion of a propensity score, were performed for the outcome variables ultimate success and first-attempt success.
resultsDuring the 28-month study period, 750 intubations were performed with either the C-MAC with a size 3 or 4 blade or a direct laryngoscope with a Macintosh size 3 or 4 blade. Of these, 255 were performed with the C-MAC as the initial device and 495 with a Macintosh direct laryngoscope as the initial device. The C-MAC resulted in successful intubation in 248 of 255 cases (97.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 94.4% to 98.9%). A direct laryngoscope resulted in successful intubation in 418 of 495 cases (84.4%; 95% CI 81.0% to 87.5%). In the multivariate regression model, with a propensity score included, the C-MAC was positively predictive of ultimate success (odds ratio 12.7; 95% CI 4.1 to 38.8) and first-attempt success (odds ratio 2.2; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.8). When the C-MAC was used as a video laryngoscope, a Cormack-Lehane grade I or II view (video) was obtained in 117 of 125 cases (93.6%; 95% CI 87.8% to 97.2%), whereas when a direct laryngoscope was used, a grade I or II view was obtained in 410 of 495 cases (82.8%; 95% CI 79.2% to 86.1%). The C-MAC was associated with immediately recognized esophageal intubation in 4 of 255 cases (1.6%; 95% CI 0.4% to 4.0%), whereas a direct laryngoscope was associated with immediately recognized esophageal intubation in 24 of 495 cases (4.8%; 95% CI 3.1% to 7.1%).
conclusionWhen used for emergency intubations in the ED, the C-MAC was associated with a greater proportion of successful intubations and a greater proportion of Cormack-Lehane grade I or II views compared with a direct laryngoscope.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.