ArticleTurkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation2022
A Comparison of the Effectiveness of Videolaryngoscopy and Macintosh Laryngoscopy in Intubation Attempts on Adult Patients.
Article in Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hyper-angulated (Glidescope) versus intermediate-angled (UED-A) videolaryngoscopy for routine tracheal intubation in adults: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Evaluating the predictive efficacy of the El-Ganzouri risk index for difficult laryngoscopy and intubation with King VisionIndian journal of anaesthesia · 2024Article
- Enhancing Airway Management: A Comparative Study of Macintosh and TAS Scope in Difficult Intubations.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the effectiveness of videolaryngoscopy and Macintosh laryngoscopy on adult patients who were scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia.
methodsOf the 200 adult patients who were scheduled to undergo general anaesthesia, 100 were intubated with a videolaryngoscope and 100 with a Macintosh laryngoscope. The patients' age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, height, weight, body mass index, smoking and alcohol habits, comorbidity, and neck circumference were recorded. Their El-Ganzouri Risk Index score, which considers the parameters of mouth opening, thyromental distance, Mallampati score, neck movement, propensity for prognathism, body weight, and history of difficult intubation, was also calculated and recorded. The time to achieve intubation was then recorded. The number of intubation attempts, number of cases of difficult intubation, Cormack-Lehane scores, and incidences of trauma or complication were also evaluated.
resultsThe mean intubation time was found to be significantly lower in the videolaryngoscope group compared to the Macintosh laryngoscope group. Although the number of patients with difficult intubation was high in the videolaryngoscope group, when we evaluated their glottic view, the Cormack-Lehane score was found to be significantly lower. The number and ratio of complications due to intubation were lower in the videolaryngoscope group compared to the Macintosh laryngoscopy group.
conclusionsIn patients undergoing endotracheal intubation for general anaesthesia, it was concluded that videolaryngoscopy is superior to Macintosh laryngoscopy as it enlarges the glottic view, shortens the time to achieve intubation, facilitates intubation, and has less risk of complications.
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.