Vidhya Sri, Sharma Brahmanand, Swain Bhanu P, Singh U K
Department of Anesthesiology, Tata Main Hospital, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, India.
Senior Resident, Department of Anesthesiology, University College of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
J Family Med Prim Care. 2020 Mar 26;9(3):1436-1441. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1068_19. eCollection 2020 Mar.
Unidentified difficult airway leads to significant adverse events and therefore prediction of a difficult airway is of importance. Independent bedside tests for the prediction of a difficult airway have poor accuracy. The airway assessment scores have not gained popularity as they are cumbersome to perform at the bedside. They also have a varying degree of interobserver variability because of their subjective parameters. Therefore, there is a need to search for a simple score with objective parameters that can be performed at the bedside.
To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Wilson score andiIntubation prediction score for predicting difficult airway in the Eastern Indian population.
A prospective single-blind study was done including 150 consecutive patients, ASA grade I and II between the ages of 18 and 70 years, undergoing surgery requiring general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation. Preoperatively, the airway was assessed in all patients using Wilson Score and Intubation Prediction Score. General anesthesia with endotracheal intubation was done in all patients. The airway was assessed for ease laryngoscopy and intubation using the Intubation Difficulty Scale. An IDS >5 was taken as difficult airway. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of the two predictive tests to predict a difficult was calculated.
The sensitivity, positive predictive value and accuracy of Intubation Prediction Score was 77.8%, 58.3%and 90.7% respectively as compared to 38.9%, 25.95% and 78.33% respectively of Wilsons score.
Intubation Prediction score with its objective parameters can be preferred as a simple and accurate bedside test to predict a difficult airway in an Eastern Indian population.
不明原因的困难气道会导致严重不良事件,因此预测困难气道至关重要。用于预测困难气道的独立床旁检查准确性较差。气道评估评分并未得到广泛应用,因为在床旁进行操作很繁琐。由于其主观参数,它们还存在不同程度的观察者间差异。因此,需要寻找一种具有客观参数且能在床旁进行的简单评分方法。
确定Wilson评分和插管预测评分在预测东印度人群困难气道方面的诊断准确性。
进行了一项前瞻性单盲研究,纳入150例连续的患者,年龄在18至70岁之间,ASA分级为I级和II级,接受需要气管内插管全身麻醉的手术。术前,使用Wilson评分和插管预测评分对所有患者的气道进行评估。所有患者均进行气管内插管全身麻醉。使用插管难度量表评估喉镜检查和插管的难易程度。IDS>5被视为困难气道。计算两种预测试验预测困难气道的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和准确性。
插管预测评分的敏感性、阳性预测值和准确性分别为77.8%、58.3%和90.7%,而Wilson评分分别为38.9%、25.95%和78.33%。
具有客观参数的插管预测评分可作为一种简单准确的床旁检查方法,用于预测东印度人群的困难气道。