ArticleBMC emergency medicine2023
A pilot, prospective trial of IntuBrite® versus Macintosh direct laryngoscopy for paramedic endotracheal intubation in out of hospital cardiac arrest.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05607836 (A Pilot, Prospective, Randomized Trial of IntuBrite Versus Macintosh Direct Laryngoscopy for Paramedic Endotracheal Intubation in Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest), which is not on this 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.
A Pilot, Prospective, Randomized Trial of IntuBrite Versus Macintosh Direct Laryngoscopy for Paramedic Endotracheal Intubation in Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endotracheal Intubation Outside the Operating Room: Year in Review 2023.Respiratory care · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntubation in the case of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is one of the most difficult procedures for Emergency Medical Services (EMS). The use of a laryngoscope with a dual light source is an interesting alternative to classic laryngoscopes. However, there are as yet no prospective data concerning the use of double light direct laryngoscopy (DL) by paramedics in traditional ground ambulance agencies in OHCA.
methodsWe performed a non-blinded trial in a single EMS in Poland within ambulances crews, comparing time and first pass success (FPS) for endotracheal intubation (ETI) in DL using the IntuBrite® (INT) and Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). We collected both patient and provider demographic information along with intubation details. The time and success rates were compared using an intention-to-treat analysis.
resultsOver a period of 40 months, a total of 86 intubations were performed using 42 INT and 44 MCL based on an intention-to-treat analysis. The FPS time of the ETI attempt (13.49 vs. 15.55 s) using an INT which was shorter than MCL was used (p < 0.05). First attempt success (34/42, 80.9% vs. 29/44, 64.4%) was comparable for INT and MCL with no statistical significance.
conclusionsWe found a statistically significant difference in intubation attempt time when the INT laryngoscope was used. Intubation first attempt success rates with INT and MCL were comparable with no statistical significance during CPR performed by paramedics.
trial registrationTrial was registered in Clinical Trials: NCT05607836 (10/28/2022).
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.