ArticleTurkish journal of emergency medicine
Comparison of three supraglottic airway devices for blind tracheal intubation by novice practitioners: A randomized manikin study.
Article in Turkish journal of emergency medicine. 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.
- Simulation-Based Comparison of Standard Versus Rotational Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion Techniques in Novice Anesthesiologists: A Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSupraglottic airway (SGA) devices are good alternatives for failed intubations or difficult airways. The aim of our study was to compare the success of intubation with SGA devices such as LMA Fastrach
methodsThis study was conducted in a randomized crossover design using a manikin model. Following training on the equipment used, 36 6
resultsThe successful intubation rate (Stage 1S + 2S + 3S) was 100% for LMA Fastrach and Air-Q and 83.3% for Aura-i (
conclusionOur study shows that novice practitioners can proficiently utilize LMA Fastrach, Air-Q, and Aura-i as SGAs in airway management. LMA Fastrach and Air-Q are more successful for endotracheal intubation than Aura-i. While the successful intubation time with SGA is similar for all three devices, the successful SGA insertion time is shorter with LMA Fastrach and Aura-i compared to Air-Q. Practitioners preferred LMA Fastrach and Air-Q more than Aura-i.
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.