Trial reportAnaesthesiology intensive therapy2021
Glottic views using a Miller size 0 blade are superior to those from a Macintosh size 0 blade in neonates: a randomized trial.
Trial report in Anaesthesiology intensive therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Initial Laryngoscope Blade Selection and Outcomes in Paediatric Emergency Department Intubations: Miller vs. Macintosh.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2026Article
- Article
- Association between video laryngoscopy characteristics and successful neonatal tracheal intubation: a prospective study.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2024Article
- Comparison of the Effectiveness of the Miller Laryngoscope and the McGrath-MAC Video Laryngoscope in Direct Visualization of the Glottic Opening.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- A Prospective Comparative Study of Laryngeal Glottic View Using the Vie ScopeTherapeutics and clinical risk management · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBoth the Miller and Macintosh blades are commonly used during laryngoscopy in infants and children, although the glottic views have not been compared in neonates. This study compared the glottic views with the Miller and Macintosh size 0 blades in neonates when the blades were placed above and below the epiglottis. MATERIAL AND
methodsForty anaesthetized and paralyzed neonates undergoing elective surgery were enrolled and randomized to either the Miller or Macintosh size 0 blade. Two glottic views were obtained in random order in each neonate and were photographed using the same blade: lifting the epiglottis first then the tongue base or vice versa. The percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scores were evaluated with each view. The POGO scores and cardiorespiratory variables were then analysed.
resultsThe POGO scores using the Miller blade to lift both the epiglottis and the tongue base were similar, whereas the scores using the Macintosh blade to lift the epiglottis were greater than those to lift the tongue base. The POGO scores using the Miller blade in both positions were significantly greater than those using the Macintosh blade in the corresponding positions (P = 0.0001). The heart rate using the Miller blade was greater than that using the Macintosh blade (P = 0.0001).
conclusionsIn neonates, the glottic views using the Miller size 0 blade to lift both the epiglottis and the tongue base were deemed to be excellent and superior to those using the Macintosh blade in both positions.
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.