ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2025
Video Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation: A Consideration for Manual In-Line Stabilization Without Cervical Collar Versus Full Immobilization.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2025. 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.
- Airway management skills and devices on Italian helicopter emergency medical service: a national survey.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Efficacy and Risk Assessment of Lateral Position Endotracheal Intubation Combined with Airway Surface Anesthesia in Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Study.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Traumatic patients with cervical spine motion restriction have difficulty with endotracheal intubation (ETI) due to the limitations of neck movement and mouth opening. Nevertheless, the removal of the cervical collar for ETI in a prehospital setting may lead to a deterioration in neurological outcomes. This study compares the success rate of ETI utilizing a video laryngoscope (VL) on a manikin, contrasting manual in-line stabilization (MILS) without a cervical hard collar against full immobilization. Methods: A randomized, non-crossover study was conducted involving 56 paramedic students assigned by SNOSE to utilize various box sizes for VL intubation with MILS without a cervical hard collar or full immobilization technique on a manikin. The primary outcome was the intubation success rate. Secondary outcomes included attempts, time for successful intubation, and Cormack-Lehane classification. Results: Fifty-six participants were evaluated; 28 were in the full immobilization group, and another 28 were in the MILS without cervical hard collar group. Baseline characteristics showed no difference between both groups. The success rate of VL intubation showed no difference between the full immobilization group and the MILS without a cervical hard collar group (28 [100%] vs 28 [100%]; 24 [85.71%] vs 27 [96.43%] on first attempt; 4 [14.29%] vs 1 [3.57%] on second attempt; p-value 0.352). Time required to perform successful intubation (median [IQR] 17.20 [12.53, 24.40] vs 17.53 [14.06, 23.73], p-value 0.694) and Cormack-Lehane classification (11 [39.29%] vs 10 [35.71%] in grade I; 16 [57.14%] vs 17 [60.71%] in grade II; 1 [3.57%] vs 1 [3.57%] in grade III, p-value 1.000) showed no statistical difference between the two groups. Conclusion: It is unnecessary to remove the cervical hard collar when performing endotracheal intubation while using a video laryngoscope.
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.