Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2014
Comparison of intubation performance between the King Vision and Macintosh laryngoscopes in novice personnel: a randomized, crossover manikin study.
Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
Comparative Study of King Vision® Standard Blade and King Vision® Channeled for Tracheal Intubation: a Prospective Randomised Study
A Randomized Comparison of the King Vision Video Laryngoscope aBlade vs. Direct Laryngoscopy in Children
Comparison of King Vision Video Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope in Terms of First Pass Intubation Success Rate, Intubation Time, Glottic View Time, and Complications Related to Laryngoscopy
A Clinical Evaluation of the King Vision Video Laryngoscope aBlade System in Children
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation status of definitive airway management simulators: a systematic review.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Ease of intubation: King vision video laryngoscope versus macintosh laryngoscope.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Article
- Video Laryngoscopy Using King Vision™ aBlade™ and Direct Laryngoscopy in Paediatric Airway Management: A Randomized Controlled Study about Device Learning by Anaesthesia Residents.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Recent Advances in Videolaryngoscopy for One-Lung Ventilation in Thoracic Anesthesia: A Narrative Review.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- Comparison of four channelled videolaryngoscopes to Macintosh laryngoscope for simulated intubation of critically ill patients: the randomized MACMAN2 trial.Annals of intensive care · 2021Article
- Comparison of KingVision videolaryngoscope channelled blade with Tuoren videolaryngoscope non-channelled blade in a simulated COVID-19 intubation scenario by non-anaesthesiologists and experienced anaesthesiologists: A prospective randomised crossover mannequin study.Trends in anaesthesia & critical care · 2021Article
- Proficiencies of military medical officers in intubating difficult airways.BMC emergency medicine · 2020Article
- Video Laryngoscopic Intubation Using the King VisionDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Article
- Comparison of VividTrac®, Airtraq®, King Vision®, Macintosh Laryngoscope and a Custom-Made Videolaryngoscope for difficult and normal airways in mannequins by novices.BMC anesthesiology · 2017Article
- Transfer of skills and comparison of performance between king vision® video laryngoscope and macintosh blade following an AHA airway management course.BMC anesthesiology · 2017Article
- Comparison of intubation success and glottic visualization using King Vision and C-MAC videolaryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine injuries with cervical immobilization: A randomized clinical trial.Surgical neurology international · 2017Article
- The AirView Study: Comparison of Intubation Conditions and Ease between the Airtraq-AirView and the King Vision.BioMed research international · 2015Article
- Case Report: Double lumen tube insertion in a morbidly obese patient through the non-channelled blade of the King Vision (™) videolaryngoscope.F1000Research · 2014Article
- A Comparative Study in Airway Novices Using King Vision Videolaryngoscope and Conventional Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope for Endotracheal Intubation.Anesthesia, essays and researchesArticle
- Evolution of videolaryngoscopy in pediatric population.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyReview
- Comparison of the time to successful endotracheal intubation using the Macintosh laryngoscope or KingVision video laryngoscope in the emergency department: A prospective observational study.Turkish journal of emergency medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe King Vision laryngoscope is a newly developed video laryngoscope. We conducted a simulation study to evaluate the efficacy of the King Vision in novice personnel.
methodsThirty-one registered nurses with no previous experience with tracheal intubation were enrolled. Participants made 6 consecutive attempts at intubation of the manikin's trachea with a Macintosh laryngoscope (MAC) and the King Vision with channeled blade (KVC) and non-channeled blade (KVNC) in a randomized cross-over fashion. The Grading Scale of Intubation Difficulty (GSID) was rated on a 5-point scale.
resultsOverall median (range) intubation times (sec) were 16.9 (8.0-60.0) with the MAC, 20.5 (7.2-60.0) with the KVC, and 60.0 (11.0-60.0) with the KVNC. The KVNC required significantly longer intubation time compared with the MAC or the KVC (p < 0.001). Success rate with the KVNC was 47.3 %, which was significantly inferior to that with the MAC (91.4 %) or KVC (86.6 %). Median GSID was 2 (range 1-5) with the KVC and 3 (1-4) with the MAC, which were both significantly lower than the 4 (2-5) with the KVNC (p < 0.001). Esophageal intubation with the MAC occurred in 18 of 186 attempts, whereas no incidents of esophageal intubation occurred with the KVC or KVNC.
conclusionThe KVC facilitated intubation by novice personnel without incidence of esophageal intubation. However, intubation times, success rates, and GSID scores were similar to the values obtained with the MAC. These findings suggest that the KVC, but not the KVNC, could be used as an alternative device for intubation by novice personnel.
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.