Russi Christopher S, Wilcox Cari L, House Hans R
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Am J Emerg Med. 2007 Mar;25(3):263-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2006.03.018.
Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a motor skill that demands practice. Emergency medical service providers with limited intubation experience should consider using airway adjuncts other than ETI for respiratory compromise. Prehospital ETI has been recently interrogated by evidence exposing worsened patient outcomes. The laryngeal tube (LT) airway was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2003 for use in the United States. Using difficult airway-simulated models, we sought to describe the time difference between placing the ETI and LT and the successful placement of each adjunct in varied levels of healthcare providers.
Emergency medicine resident physicians, fourth year medical students, and paramedic students were asked to use both ETI and the LT. Subjects were timed (seconds) on ETI and LT placement on 2 different simulators (AirMan and SimMan; Laerdal Co, Wappingers Falls, NY). After ETI was complete, they were given 30 seconds to review an instructional card before placement of the LT. We measured placement time and successful placement of the device for ETI vs LT. Successful placement in the manikin was defined by a combination of breath sounds, chest rise, and absence of epigastric sounds.
Overall mean placement time in the AirMan and SimMan for ETI was 76.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.3-89.5) and 45.9 (95% CI, 41.0-50.2) seconds, respectively. Mean placement time for the LT in the AirMan and SimMan was 26.9 (95% CI, 24.3-29.5) and 20.3 (95% CI, 18.1-22.5) seconds, respectively. The time difference between ETI and LT for both simulators was significant (P < .0001). Successful placement of the LT compared with ETI in the AirMan was significant (P = .001).
A significant time difference and simplicity exists in placing the LT, making it an attractive device for expeditious airway management. Further studies will need to validate the LT effectiveness in ventilation and oxygenation; however, its uncomplicated design allows for successful use by a variety of healthcare providers.
气管插管(ETI)是一项需要练习的操作技能。插管经验有限的急救医疗服务人员在处理呼吸功能不全时应考虑使用ETI以外的气道辅助装置。近期有证据表明院外ETI会使患者预后恶化,这引发了人们对其的质疑。喉罩气道(LT)于2003年获得美国食品药品监督管理局批准在美国使用。我们使用模拟困难气道模型,试图描述在不同级别的医疗服务人员中放置ETI和LT的时间差异以及每种辅助装置的成功放置情况。
要求急诊医学住院医师、四年级医学生和护理专业学生同时使用ETI和LT。在2种不同的模拟器(AirMan和SimMan;莱迪思公司,纽约州瓦平格斯福尔斯)上对受试者放置ETI和LT的时间(秒)进行计时。完成ETI放置后,在放置LT前给他们30秒时间查看指导卡片。我们测量了ETI与LT的放置时间以及装置的成功放置情况。人体模型中的成功放置由呼吸音、胸廓起伏和上腹部无声音综合判断。
在AirMan和SimMan上,ETI的总体平均放置时间分别为76.4秒(95%置信区间[CI],63.3 - 89.5)和45.9秒(95%CI,41.0 - 50.2)。在AirMan和SimMan上,LT的平均放置时间分别为26.9秒(95%CI,24.3 - 29.5)和20.3秒(95%CI,18.1 - 22.5)。两种模拟器上ETI和LT的时间差异均具有统计学意义(P < .0001)。在AirMan上,LT与ETI相比成功放置具有统计学意义(P = .001)。
放置LT存在显著的时间差异且操作简单,使其成为快速气道管理的一种有吸引力的装置。进一步的研究需要验证LT在通气和氧合方面的有效性;然而,其简单的设计允许各种医疗服务人员成功使用。