Observational studyArchives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition2026
Comparison of functional features and user experience with different types of video laryngoscopes when used on neonatal manikins.
Observational study in Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA wide range of neonatal-specific video laryngoscopes (VLs) are now available, each offering unique design features. Understanding these differences is essential to support training and optimise clinical use in neonatal airway management.
objectiveTo compare the physical and functional characteristics of four commonly used neonatal VLs and assess user experience.
methodsIn this observational study, four VL systems-C-MAC, GlideScope, InfantView and NeoView were evaluated. A technical comparison of blade design and dimensions was performed across available blade sizes, alongside a conventional Miller blade. Medical professionals attending a neonatal airway workshop then used each device on neonatal manikins and rated their experience using a 4-point scale across six domains: ease of use, airway visualisation, ease of intubation, image quality, blade size and blade design.
resultsA total of 23 participants with varied clinical backgrounds completed the evaluation. While 65% routinely performed neonatal intubations, 80% reported fewer than 10 intubations annually and 65% preferred conventional laryngoscopy. Following the trial, most participants favoured the C-MAC and NeoView VLs, and GlideScope was perceived to mimic conventional laryngoscope. The NeoView and C-MAC devices had the shortest distance between the camera and the distal blade tip. All VLs supported video and image capture. NeoView and GlideScope used disposable blades, while others employed reusable blades.
conclusionsThis study provides a systematic comparison of the physical features and user preferences for commonly available neonatal VLs. These insights can guide equipment selection, inform training programmes and promote safer neonatal airway management.
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.