ArticleOpen access emergency medicine : OAEM2022
Success Rate on Endotracheal Intubation with Prone versus Kneeling Position in Mannequin Model with Limitation of Neck Movement: A Cross Over Study.
Article in Open access emergency medicine : OAEM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Endotracheal intubation is a lifesaving procedure for airway management but is more complex when performed in patients lying on the ground and requiring cervical spine immobilization. This study aims to compare the optimal technique between prone and kneeling positions in increasing intubation success rate on these prehospital trauma patients. Patients and Methods: This study was an experimental study on a mannequin. Paramedic students performed intubation on the supine mannequin, which was applied with a rigid cervical collar and manual in-line stabilization. The participants were randomly assigned to intubate in a prone or kneeling position as the first method, then perform another method seven days later. Study outcomes include the percentage of successful intubation, time to perform intubation successfully, and Cormack and Lehane's classification of laryngeal view. Results: Thirty-nine participants were enrolled in this study; 22 were male (56.41%). The mean age, weight, and height were 23.15 ± 4.75 years, 67.38 ± 17.39 kg, and 167.36 ± 8.70 cm., respectively. The percentage of successful intubation in prone (37 [94.90%]) was higher than kneeling position (35 [89.74%]), but there was no statistically significant (p-value = 0.675). Time to intubation successfully, the number of attempts, and Cormack & Lehane's laryngeal view classification were not significantly different between prone and kneeling groups (p-value = 0.808, 0.814, and 0.948, respectively). Conclusion: Intubation with the prone or kneeling position on a mannequin, lying on the ground with cervical spine immobilization, has no statistical difference. Both intubation approaches appear to be effective in successful and rapid intubation, proper glottic visualization and low attempts.
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.