Objective Orotracheal intubation is a life-saving procedure commonly performed in the Intensive Care unit and Emergency Department as a part of emergency airway management. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, our center undertook a prospective observational study to characterize emergency intubation performed in the emergency department and critical care settings at Manitoba’s largest tertiary hospital. During this study, a natural experiment emerged when a standardized “COVID-Protected Rapid Sequence Intubation Protocol” was implemented in response to the pandemic. The resultant study aimed to answer the question; in adult ED patients undergoing emergent intubation by EM and CCM teams, does the use of a “COVID-Protected Rapid Sequence Intubation Protocol” impact first-pass success or other intubation-related outcomes? Methods A single-center prospective quasi-experimental before and after study was conducted. Data were prospectively collected on consecutive emergent intubations. The primary outcome was the difference in first-pass success rates. Secondary outcomes included best Modified Cormack–Lehane view, hypoxemia, hypotension, esophageal intubation, cannot intubate cannot oxygenate scenarios, CPR post intubation, vasopressors required post intubation, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), and mechanical ventilation days. Results Data were collected on 630 patients, 416 in the pre-protocol period and 214 in the post-protocol period. First-pass success rates in the pre-protocol period were found to be 73.1% ( n = 304). Following the introduction of the protocol, first-pass success rates increased to 82.2% ( n = 176, p = 0.0105). There was a statistically significant difference in Modified Cormack–Lehane view favoring the protocol ( p = 0.0191). Esophageal intubation rates were found to be 5.1% pre-protocol introduction versus 0.5% following the introduction of the protocol ( p = 0.0172). Conclusion A “COVID-Protected Protocol” implemented by Emergency Medicine and Critical Care teams in response to the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased first-pass success rates and decreases in adverse events. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43678-022-00422-w.
Purpose Emergency airway management can be associated with a range of complications including long-term neurologic injury and death. We studied the first-pass success rate with emergency airway management in a tertiary care trauma centre. Secondary outcomes were to identify factors associated with first-pass success and factors associated with adverse events peri-intubation. Methods We performed a single-centre, prospective, observational study of patients ≥ 17 yr old who were intubated in the emergency department (ED), surgical intensive care unit (SICU), medical intensive care unit (MICU), and inpatient wards at our institution. Ethics approval was obtained from the local research ethics board. Results In a seven-month period, there were 416 emergency intubations and a first-pass success rate of 73.1%. The first-pass success rates were 57.5% on the ward, 66.1% in the intensive care units (ICUs) and 84.3% in the ED. Equipment also varied by location; videolaryngoscopy use was 65.1% in the ED and only 10.6% on wards. A multivariate regression model using the least absolute shrinkage and selection algorithm (LASSO) showed that the odds ratios for factors associated with two or more intubation attempts were location (wards, 1.23; MICU, 1.24; SICU, 1.19; reference group, ED), physiologic instability (1.19), an anatomically difficult airway (1.05), hypoxemia (1.98), lack of neuromuscular blocker use (2.28), and intubator inexperience (1.41). Conclusions First-pass success rates varied widely between locations within the hospital and were less than those published from similar institutions, except for the ED. We are revamping ICU protocols to improve the first-pass success rate. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12630-022-02390-2.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.