Trial reportMedicine2015
Can the ETView VivaSight SL Rival Conventional Intubation Using the Macintosh Laryngoscope During Adult Resuscitation by Novice Physicians?: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study.
Trial report in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Can the ETView VivaSight SL Rival the Macintosh Laryngoscopy With Conventional Tube During Adult Resuscitation by Novice Physicians: a Randomized Crossover Simulation Study.
Ability of Anesthesiologist to Placid a Double-lumen Tube. A Randomized Crossover Cadaver Study Comparing VivaSight DL and Conventional Double-lumen Tube
Intubation During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
Prospective, Randomized Study in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Endotracheal Intubation: Comparison Between a Conventional Approach and Video Assisted Intubation by the VivaSight™-SL Tube
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- ETView VivaSight single lumen vs. conventional intubation in simulated studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Pooled it
- The use of ETView endotracheal tube for surveillance after tube positioning in patients undergoing lobectomy, randomized trial.Medicine · 2018Trial
- Endotracheal tube-mounted camera-assisted intubation versus conventional intubation in intensive care: a prospective, randomised trial (VivaITN).Critical care (London, England) · 2018Trial
- Bronchoscopy versus an endotracheal tube mounted camera for the peri-interventional visualization of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy - a prospective, randomized trial (VivaPDT).Critical care (London, England) · 2017Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Effect of visual endotracheal tube combined with bronchial occluder on pulmonary ventilation and arterial blood gas in patients undergoing thoracic surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Clinical value of video-assisted single-lumen endotracheal intubation and application of artificial intelligence in it.American journal of translational research · 2022Review
- Tracheal Tube-Mounted Camera Assisted Intubation vs. Videolaryngoscopy in Expected Difficult Airway: A Prospective, Randomized Trial (VivaOP Trial).Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Use of the ETView Tracheoscopic Ventilation Tube in airway management of a patient with unanticipated difficult bag-mask ventilation.Journal of anesthesia · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledThe aim of this study was to assess the performance of the ETView VivaSight SL (ETView) single-lumen airway tube with an integrated high-resolution imaging camera in a manikin-simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation scenario with and without chest compression. This was a randomized crossover manikin trial. Following a brief training session, 107 volunteer novice physicians who were inexperienced with airway management attempted to intubate a manikin using a Macintosh laryngoscope (MAC) and an ETView, with and without chest compressions. The participants were instructed to make 3 attempts in each scenario. In this trial, we compared intubation time, intubation success rates, and glottic visibility using a Cormack & Lehane Grade. Dental compression and ease of use of each device were also assessed. Median intubation times for the ETView and MAC without chest compressions were 17 (IQR, 15-19) s and 27 (IQR, 25-33) s, respectively (P < 0.001). The ETView proved more successful on the first intubation attempt than the MAC, regardless of compressions. Continuation of compressions caused an increase in intubation times for both the ETView (P = 0.27) and the MAC (P < 0.005). The ETView VivaSight SL is an effective tool for endotracheal intubation when used by novice physicians in a manikin-simulated cardiac arrest, both with and without chest compressions.
trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02295618.
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.