ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2024
Evaluation of the Learning Curve of Endotracheal Intubation with Videolaryngoscopes: McGrathMAC, UESCOPE, and Airtraq by Young Anesthesiology Residents - Randomized, Controlled, Blinded Crossover Study.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hyper-angulated (Glidescope) versus intermediate-angled (UED-A) videolaryngoscopy for routine tracheal intubation in adults: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Peer education is more effective than video podcasts in enhancing tracheal intubation proficiency: A quasi-experimental study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Videolaryngoscopes increased the safety of patients requiring endotracheal intubation. Their particular beneficiaries are healthcare providers inexperienced in intubation. We compared the learning curve of McGrath, UESCOPE, and Airtraq VLs among the first-year anesthesiology residents. Methods: Sixteen residents were qualified for the study, none of whom has ever before used any VL nor had any experience with the Macintosh laryngoscope. The study was conducted during anesthesia without anticipated intubation difficulties and included 288 adult patients with BMI <25 and ASA ≤ II, without visible intubation difficulties. It was a randomized, controlled, and blinded crossover study. Each resident performed six intubations with a given VL in randomized order. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in patient characteristics. In McGrath there was observed significant improvement of intubation time, confirmed intubation time, ease, POGO scale, effective intubation, thyroid pressure application, and intubation trauma. Intubation efficacy increased from 12 (75%) at first attempt, to 16 (100%) during third and following attempts. Residents used pressure 6 times (38%) during first attempt and 7 times (44%) during second attempt, and 1 (6%) at last attempt. McGrath traumatism was noticed in 4 (25%) patients at first two attempts, none during third and following attempts. In Airtraq, we observed a significant improvement of intubation time, time of confirmed intubation, force used, ease, effective intubation, and application of pressure to thyroid cartilage. Intubation efficacy increased from 10 (62%) during the first to 16 (100%) during the following attempts. Thyroid pressure was applied 7 times (44%) during first intubation and 0 times during the last two attempts. In the case of UESCOPE VL, we observed a significant improvement of intubation time, time of confirmed intubation, force used, and ease. Conclusion: Results demonstrated that Airtraq VL having the best learning curve, and UESCOPE having the best first-time use. The results require confirmation in a larger study group. This study was approved on 14 November 2023 by the Medical University of Lodz Bioethics Committee (ref: RNN/160/23/KE).
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.