ArticleCureus2023
Comparison of Force During the Endotracheal Intubation of Commercial Simulation Manikins.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Medical simulation allows clinicians to safely practice the procedural skill of endotracheal intubation. Applied force to oropharyngeal structures increases the risk of patient harm, and video laryngoscopy (VL) requires less force to obtain a glottic view. It is unknown how much force is required to obtain a glottic view using commercially available simulation manikins and if variability exists. This study compares laryngoscopy force for a modified Cormack-Lehane (CL) grade I view in both normal and difficult airway scenarios between three commercially available simulation manikins. Methods Experienced clinicians (≥2 years experience) were recruited to participate from critical care, emergency medicine, and anesthesia specialties. A C-MAC size 3 VL blade was equipped with five force resistor reading (FSR) sensors (four concave surfaces, one convex), measuring resistance (Ohms) in response to applied pressure (1-100 Newtons). The study occurred in a university simulation lab. Using a randomized sequence, 49 physicians performed intubations on three manikins (Laerdal SimMan 3GPlus, Gaumard Hal S3201, CAE Apollo) in normal and difficult airway scenarios. The outcomes were sensor mean pressure, peak force, and CL grade. Summary statistics were calculated. Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) conducted for both scenarios assessed changes in pressure measured in three manikins while accounting for correlated responses of individuals assigned in random order. Paired t-test assessed for the in-manikin difference between scenarios. STATA/BE v17 (R) was used for analysis; results interpreted at type I error alpha is 0.05. Results Participants included 49 experienced clinicians. Mean years' experience was 4(±6.6); median prior intubations were 80 (IQR 50-400). Mean individual sensor pressure varied within scenarios depending on manikin (p<0.001). Higher mean forces were used in difficult scenarios (603.4±128.9, 611.1±101.4, 467.5±72.4 FSR) than normal (462.5±121.9, 596.0±90.5, 290.6±63.2 FSR) for each manikin (p<0.001). All manikins required more peak force in the difficult scenario (p<0.03). The highest mean forces (Laerdal, CAE, difficult scenario) were associated with the higher frequency of grade 2A views (p<0.001). The Gaumard manikin was rated most realistic in terms of force required to intubate. Conclusion Commercially available high-fidelity manikins had significant variability in laryngoscopy force in both normal and difficult airway scenarios. In difficult airway scenarios, significant variability existed in CL grade between manikin brands. Experienced clinicians rated Gaumard Hal as the most realistic force applied during endotracheal intubation.
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.