The i-gel

Objective: Unlike randomized controlled trials, practical real-world studies can offer important information about implementation of prehospital interventions, particularly in community settings where there may be reluctance to adopt new practices. We present the results of a natural experiment that was driven by mandated COVID-19 pandemic-driven shift from endotracheal intubation (ETI) to the i-gel Methods: This pre/post study compared airway placement metrics in prehospital patients requiring advance airway management for non-trauma-related conditions. Data from EMS records were extracted over 2 years, 12 months pre-pandemic, and 12 months post-pandemic. During the pre-COVID-19 year, the EMS protocols utilized ETI as the primary advanced airway device (ETI group). Post-pandemic paramedics were mandated to utilize i-gel Results: There were 199 adult patients, 83 (42%) in the ETI group and 116 (58%) in the SGA group. First-pass success was significantly higher with SGA 96% (92%-99%) than ETI 68% (57%-78%) with paramedics citing the inability to visualize the airway in 52% of ETI cases. Time to first-pass success was significantly shorter in the SGA group (5.9 min [5.1-6.7 min]) than in the ETI group (8.3 min [6.9-9.6 min]), as was time to overall successful placement at 6.0 min (5.1-6.8 min) versus 9.6 min (8.2-11.1 min), respectively. Multiple placement attempts were required in 26% of ETI cases and 1% of the SGA cases. There were no statistically significant differences in the number and types of complications between the cohorts. Return of spontaneous circulation (on/before emergency department [ED] arrival), mortality at 28 days, intensive care unit length of stay, or ventilator-free days between the groups were not statistically different between the groups. Conclusion: In this natural experiment, the SGA performed significantly better than ETI in first-pass airway device placement success and was significantly faster in achieving first-pass success, and overall airway placement, thus potentially reducing exposure to respiratory pathogens. Practical real-world studies can offer important information about implementation of prehospital interventions, particularly in community settings and in systems with a low frequency of tracheal intubations.