Trial reportEuropean journal of pediatrics2015
Comparison of the TruView PCD video laryngoscope and macintosh laryngoscope for pediatric tracheal intubation by novice paramedics: a randomized crossover simulation trial.
Trial report in European journal of pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02289872 (Comparison of the TruView PCD Video Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope for Pediatric Tracheal Intubation by Novice Paramedics), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Comparison of the TruView PCD Video Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope for Pediatric Tracheal Intubation by Novice Paramedics: A Randomized Crossover Simulation Trial.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Miller laryngoscope and UEScope videolaryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in four pediatric airway scenarios: a randomized, crossover simulation trial.European journal of pediatrics · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Comparison of blind intubation with different supraglottic airway devices by inexperienced physicians in several airway scenarios: a manikin study.European journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
- Comparison of Different Intubation Methods in Difficult Airways during Simulated Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation with Continuous Chest Compression: A Randomized Cross-Over Manikin Trial.Emergency medicine international · 2019Article
- Comparison of the Success of Two Techniques for the Endotracheal Intubation with C-MAC Video Laryngoscope Miller Blade in Children: A Prospective Randomized Study.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledThe aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the TruView video laryngoscope (TruView) facilitates pediatric endotracheal intubation (ETI) more quickly and safely than conventional Macintosh laryngoscope (MAC) in three manikin-based airway scenarios. This was a randomized crossover manikin study including 120 novice paramedics. The participants performed tracheal intubations using both TruView and MAC on a pediatric manikin in a control scenario (A), chest compression scenario (B), and chest compression cervical stabilization scenario (C). The sequence of scenarios was randomized. The primary outcome was time to intubation. Secondary outcomes were overall success rates, incidence of dental trauma, and ease of intubation. All intubation attempts were assessed by a trained assistant. The overall success rate was significantly higher with the TruView compared than the MAC in scenario B (100 vs. 81.7 %; p = 0.011) and scenario C (100 vs. 68.3 %; p < 0.001). The intubation time was significantly lower with the TruView than the MAC (18.5 vs. 24.3 s, p = 0.017, for scenario A; 21.6 vs. 25.7 s, p = 0.023, for scenario B; and 28.9 vs. 45.4 s, p < 0.001, for scenario C). Glottic view quality was better with TruView than the MAC in all scenarios, p < 0.001.
conclusionsThe TruView offers better intubation conditions than the MAC on a pediatric manikin in the control scenario, chest compression scenario, and chest compression scenario with cervical stabilization scenario. The TruView may be used to elevate the epiglottis for orotracheal intubation. Further clinical studies are necessary to confirm these initial positive findings.
trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02289872. WHAT IS KNOWN: •Prehospital pediatric intubation using a standard laryngoscope is varied and ranges from 63.4 to 82 %. What is New: •This is the first study showing efficiency of pediatric endotracheal intubation using the TruView PCD by paramedics in tree simulation scenarios. •TruView PCD offers better pediatric intubation conditions than the Macintosh 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.