Aims
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and utility of the McGrath™ videolaryngoscope, using the Macintosh-like McGrath™ MAC blade and the hyperangulated McGrath™ MAC Xblade with a conventional Macintosh blade under simulated resuscitation conditions.
Methods
A prospective, randomized study under conditions mimicking ongoing chest compressions was conducted with 90 anesthesiologists. Intubation success rates, time-to-vocal cords, time-to-intubate, and time-to-ventilate were measured. Additionally, the study assessed the subjective ratings and the perceived workload using the ‘NASA-task-load-index’ during the procedure.
Results
The overall intubation success rate was device dependent 99–100%. The McGrath™ MAC and McGrath™ MAC Xblade showed faster visualization times compared to conventional blades. The MAC blade demonstrated superior performance in time-to-intubate and time-to-ventilate compared to both conventional and MAC Xblades. Despite excellent visualization, the MAC Xblade posed challenges in tube placement, reflected in a prolonged intubation time of >120 seconds in one case. Both MAC and MAC Xblade reduced potential dental injuries and interruptions to chest compressions compared to conventional laryngoscopes. User experience significantly impacted intubation times with conventional laryngoscopes, but this effect was mitigated with videolaryngoscopy. Participants reported lower stress and effort when using videolaryngoscopes, with the MAC blade rated superior in perceived time pressure.
Conclusion
The study supports the superiority of videolaryngoscopy with a Macintosh-like blade over conventional laryngoscopy during mechanical chest compressions, particularly for less experienced users. The McGrath™ MAC blade, in particular, offers advantages in intubation time, user-friendliness, and reduced stress. However, the MAC Xblade’s challenges during tube placement highlight the need for further clinical validation. Continued research is essential to refine guidelines and improve resuscitation outcomes.