Regions Hospital EMS, St. Paul, MN, United States.
Resuscitation. 2011 Dec;82(12):1529-36. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.07.009. Epub 2011 Jul 18.
To compare paramedic insertion success rates and time to insertion between standard ETI and a supraglottc airway device (King LTS-D™) in patients needing advanced airway management.
Between June 2008 and June 2009, consented paramedics from 4 EMS systems performed ETI or placed a King LTS-D according to a predetermined randomization calendar. Data collection occurred following each placement via telephone. Placement success (ability to ventilate to chest rise, absence of gastric sounds, presence of bilateral lung sounds, and when applicable, quantitative end-tidal CO(2) reading) was compared between treatment groups. Time to ventilation (time from airway device in hand ready to place to time of first successful ventilation) was also compared.
A total of 213 patients in need of advanced airway management were treated during the study period, with 9 patients excluded from the analysis. The remaining 204 placements by 110 of the 272 consented paramedics were analyzed (median placements per paramedic=1; range=1-7). The overall placement success rate was virtually equal across the two groups (ETI=80.2%, King LTS-D=80.5%; p=0.97). The median time to placement between ETI and the King LTS-D was also not significantly different (ETI=19.5s vs. King LTS-D=20.0s; z=-0.25; p=0.80).
In this study, no differences in placement success rate or time to insertion were detected between the King LTS-D and ETI.
比较标准气管插管(ETI)和 King LTS-D 声门上气道装置在需要高级气道管理的患者中插管成功率和插管时间。
2008 年 6 月至 2009 年 6 月期间,4 个 EMS 系统的同意参与的护理人员根据预定的随机时间表进行 ETI 或放置 King LTS-D。放置后通过电话进行数据收集。比较两组治疗之间的放置成功率(能够进行通气到胸廓起伏、胃音缺失、双侧肺音存在以及在适用时定量呼气末 CO2 读数)。比较通气时间(从气道设备准备好到首次成功通气的时间)。
在研究期间,共有 213 名需要高级气道管理的患者接受了治疗,其中 9 名患者被排除在分析之外。分析了 110 名同意护理人员中的 204 次放置(每名护理人员的中位数放置次数=1;范围=1-7)。两组的总体放置成功率几乎相等(ETI=80.2%,King LTS-D=80.5%;p=0.97)。ETI 和 King LTS-D 之间的放置时间中位数也没有显著差异(ETI=19.5s 与 King LTS-D=20.0s;z=-0.25;p=0.80)。
在这项研究中,King LTS-D 和 ETI 之间在放置成功率或插入时间方面没有差异。