ArticleAnesthesia, essays and researches
A Comparative Evaluation of Hemodynamic Response and Ease of Intubation using Airtraq and McCoy Laryngoscope.
Article in Anesthesia, essays and researches. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVarious airway gadgets have been devised to overcome difficult airway scenario in anesthesia practice. It includes simple rigid laryngoscope to complex fiber-optic intubating devices; however, there is weak evidence to support the superiority of one device over the other. AIMS AND
objectiveThe ease of intubation, time and the hemodynamic variability between two groups during intubation are considered as the primary outcome measures. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective study, 60 patients of either sex undergoing elective surgery who required tracheal intubation were included. All the patients of age between 20 and 50 years with the American Society of Anesthesiologists Classes I and II were divided into the following two groups: Group AT (
resultsThere was no significant difference in age, sex, weight, and Mallampati grading between the two groups. More than 30% of patients in Group AT were intubated without an external aid than the Group MC (
conclusionThe AT laryngoscope is better than MC in terms of the ease of intubation, better glottis view, and hemodynamic stability. However, the incidences of sore throat in both groups were comparable.
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.