Comparison of three types of laryngoscope for tracheal intubation during rhythmic chest compressions: A manikin study

Tracheal intubation during chest compressions using Pentax-AWS®, GlideScope®, and Macintosh laryngoscope: a randomized crossover trial using a mannequin

“…9 Moreover, overall success rates were significantly lower with the Macintosh laryngoscope than with the Pentax-AWS. 7,8,10 Success rates of 100% have been reported for the Pentax-AWS compared with success rates of 57.1%, 8 74.3%, 10 and 81.3% 7 reported for the Macintosh. 8 In the present study, the overall success rate for the Macintosh laryngoscope was similar to that of the Pentax-AWS in a normal airway scenario (96.9% vs 100%, respectively).…”

“…[7][8][9][10][14][15][16] The laryngoscopes employed in the majority of these previous studies were the conventional Macintosh laryngoscope and the Pentax-AWS. [7][8][9][10]14,15 While four studies [7][8][9][10] reported that the Pentax-AWS was more effective than the Macintosh laryngoscope, two studies 14,15 reported no significant difference.…”

“…Les donne´es suivantes ont e´te´mesure´es et enregistre´es : temps jusqu'a`intubation trache´ale re´ussie (crite`re d'e´valuation principal), taux de re´ussite global, temps jusqu'a`visualisation des cordes vocales, pourcentage d'ouverture glottique, compression dentaire et facilited 'intubation. Résultats Dans les cas de voies ae´riennes normales, les temps (moyenne [e´cart interquartile]) jusqu'a`intubation trache´ale e´taient plus courts avec le Pentax-AWS (12,1 [10,1-14,4] sec) et le GlideScope (14,3 [12,[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]6] sec) qu'avec le laryngoscope Macintosh (16,5 [13,,1] sec) (P \ 0,03 pour les deux). La diffe´rence de temps entre les deux vide´olaryngoscopes n'e´tait pas significative d'un point de vue statistique.…”

“…7 In other studies, it has been reported that the Pentax-AWS is a more effective device than the Macintosh laryngoscope for the performance of tracheal intubation during uninterrupted chest compressions. [8][9][10] The GlideScope Ò (Verathon Ò , Bothell, WA, USA) is another popular indirect laryngoscope developed for the management of difficult airways. Studies have demonstrated that the GlideScope may provide a better laryngoscopic view than direct laryngoscopy, 11 and it may be advantageous for tracheal intubation in patients with a difficult airway.…”

Comparison of Pentax-AWS Airwayscope video laryngoscope, Airtraq optic laryngoscope, and Macintosh laryngoscope during cardiopulmonary resuscitation under cervical stabilization: a manikin study

“…In simulation studies utilizing a manikin, we and others have previously reported that AWS more effectively secures the airway during chest compression simulation in a manikin than the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL) [10,11]. One group reported that AWS was superior to ATQ and McL [12]. One reported weakness of ATQ was that participants had to keep their eyes very close to the monitor, which moved continuously during chest compression [12].…”