Young Scott E, Miller Michael A, Crystal Chad S, Skinner Carl, Coon Troy P
Darnall Army Community Hospital, Fort Hood, TX 76544, USA.
Am J Emerg Med. 2006 Oct;24(6):729-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2006.03.001.
This study was designed to determine whether digital intubation is a valid option for definitive airway control by emergency physicians.
Digital intubation was performed by 18 emergency medicine residents and 4 staff emergency medicine physicians on 6 different cadavers. Placement was confirmed by direct laryngoscopy. The total time for all attempts used, as well as the number of attempts, was recorded. Each participant attempted intubation on all 6 cadavers.
For 5 of the 6 cadavers, successful intubation occurred 90.9% of the time (confidence interval [CI], 85.5%-96.3%) for all participants. The average number of attempts for these 5 cadavers was 1.5 (CI, 1.4-1.7), and the average time required for success or failure was 20.8 seconds (CI, 16.9-24.8). The sixth cadaver developed soft tissue damage and a false passage near the vocal cords resulting in multiple failed attempts.
Although the gold standard for routine endotracheal intubation remains to be direct laryngoscopy, its effectiveness in certain situations may be limited. We believe that digital intubation provides emergency physicians with another option in securing the unprotected airway.
本研究旨在确定数字插管是否是急诊医生进行确定性气道控制的有效选择。
18名急诊医学住院医师和4名急诊医学 staff 医生对6具不同的尸体进行数字插管。通过直接喉镜检查确认插管位置。记录所有尝试使用的总时间以及尝试次数。每位参与者对所有6具尸体都进行了插管尝试。
对于6具尸体中的5具,所有参与者成功插管的时间为90.9%(置信区间[CI],85.5%-96.3%)。这5具尸体的平均尝试次数为1.5次(CI,1.4-1.7),成功或失败所需的平均时间为20.8秒(CI,16.9-24.8)。第六具尸体出现了软组织损伤和声门附近的假通道,导致多次尝试失败。
虽然常规气管插管的金标准仍然是直接喉镜检查,但其在某些情况下的有效性可能有限。我们认为数字插管为急诊医生确保未受保护气道提供了另一种选择。