Milk Nadav, Rosman Yossi, Yavnai Nirit, Cohen Barak, Ophir Nimrod, Eisenkraft Arik, Kassirer Michael
Israel Defense Forces Medical Corps, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Unit of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Saba, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Am J Disaster Med. 2020;15(2):85-92. doi: 10.5055/ajdm.2020.0358.
To determine whether application of a gum-elastic bougie (GEB), a visual stylet used to improve success rates of difficult intubations, reduces the time, and number of attempts to achieve successful intubation while wearing personal protective equipment (PPE).
A randomized cross-over study comparing orotracheal intubations performed on an AirMan® Mannequin, using either a semirigid stylet or a GEB, while wearing an active hood with a charcoal impregnated suit and butyl rubber gloves.
Simulation training field of the Israel Defense Force Medical Corps.
27 military physicians and 23 paramedics (PMs).
Comparing intubation with and without using the GEB while wearing PPE.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Airway (AW) control was considered successful if the "lungs" of the mannequin ex-panded during bag ventilation. Three unsuccessful attempts or a procedure exceeding 60 seconds were regarded as a failure. Correlations between parameters of self-assessment of skills and successful intubation were also determined.
With the GEB, success rate was lower (82 percent versus 100 percent, p = 0.002), more attempts were needed (1.4 ± 0.7 versus 1.0 ± 0.2, p = 0.005) and time-to-achieve AW control was longer (43.6 ± 14.6 sec-onds versus 23.1 ± 10.5 seconds, P < 0.001) than without it. Participants with high self-assessment of GEB-assisted AW management skills needed less attempts to perform successful intubation with GEB than participants with low self-assessment (1.0 ± 0.0 versus 1.4 ± 0.8, p = 0.001), but not less time to achieve it.
While donning PPE, the use of GEB (versus semirigid stylets) did not reduce the time or the number of attempts necessary to achieve successful intubation.
确定使用弹性橡胶探条(GEB)这种用于提高困难插管成功率的可视管芯,在穿戴个人防护装备(PPE)时是否能减少成功插管所需的时间和尝试次数。
一项随机交叉研究,比较在AirMan®人体模型上进行经口气管插管时,使用半硬管芯或GEB,同时穿戴带有活性炭浸渍套装和丁腈橡胶手套的主动式头罩的情况。
以色列国防军医疗队模拟训练场。
27名军医和23名护理人员(PMs)。
比较穿戴PPE时使用和不使用GEB进行插管的情况。
如果人体模型的“肺部”在球囊通气时扩张,则气道(AW)控制被视为成功。三次不成功的尝试或超过60秒的操作被视为失败。还确定了技能自我评估参数与成功插管之间的相关性。
使用GEB时,成功率较低(82%对100%,p = 0.002),需要更多尝试(1.4±0.7对1.0±0.2,p = 0.005),实现气道控制的时间更长(43.6±14.6秒对23.1±10.5秒,P < 0.001)。自我评估GEB辅助气道管理技能高的参与者与自我评估低的参与者相比,使用GEB成功插管所需的尝试次数更少(1.0±0.0对1.4±0.8,p = 0.001),但实现成功插管所需的时间并不更少。
在穿戴PPE时,使用GEB(与半硬管芯相比)并没有减少成功插管所需的时间或尝试次数。