ArticleBalkan medical journal2015
A Comparison of the Effects of Different Types of Laryngoscope on the Cervical Motions: Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Balkan medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02191904 (Laryngoscope Types and The Cervical Motion), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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.
Laryngoscope Types and The Cervical Motion
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Quantitative analysis of gaze and body movement differences by proficiency in direct and video laryngoscope intubation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rate of cervical injury among all trauma patients is 3.1%. The most important point during intubation of those patients is not to increase the cervical injury.
aimsIn this study, we hypothesize that there will be a minimal cervical extension during a laryngoscopy with the use of optical view laryngoscopes. STUDY
designProspective, randomized clinical trial.
methodsOne hundred and fifty adult patients with ASA physical status I to III were enrolled in our study. After routine anesthesia induction, we randomly assigned the patients into three groups according to the type of laryngoscope. Macintosh type, Truview EVO2(®) type and Airtraq® type laryngoscopes were used in Group DL (n=50), Group TW (n=50) and Group ATQ (n=50), respectively. After applying general anesthesia induction and mask ventilation, all of the patients were positioned in the neutral position. An inclinometer was placed on the forehead of the patients. Then, the extension angle during intubation and the Cormack-Lehane Score were measured and the time to intubation was recorded.
resultsOne of the 50 patients in the DL Group, 2 of the 50 patients in the TW Group, and 4 of the 50 patients in the ATQ Group were excluded from the study because of the failure of intubation at defined times. The angle of cervical extension during laryngoscopy was found to be 27.24±6.71, 18.08±7.53, and 14.54±4.09 degrees in the Groups DL, TV and ATQ, respectively; these differences also had statistical significance (p=0.000). The duration of intubation was found to be 13.59±5.49, 23.60±15.23, and 29.80±13.82 seconds in Groups DL, TV and ATQ, respectively (p=0.000).
conclusionA minimal cervical motion was obtained during tracheal intubation with the use of Truview EVO2® and Airtraq® types of laryngoscope compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02191904).
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.