Introduction and evaluation of new airway devices: Current issues

Cook, Tim; Pandit, Jaideep P.; Wilkes, A. R.

doi:10.1016/j.tacc.2012.08.002

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A steadily increasing number of videolaryngoscopes are marketed, but a sound evaluation before marketing is often missing. [2][3][4] Videolaryngoscopes vary with regard to the shape of their blades, camera location, video screen, integration of a channel for tracheal tube guidance, and single-use vs multiple-use design. Many studies on videolaryngoscopes were carried out in manikins, [5][6][7][8] in cadavers, 7 or in patients with normal airways.…”

Section: Editor's Key Pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Kleine‐Brueggeney

Greif

Schoettker

et al. 2016

British Journal of Anaesthesia

179

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Editor's Key Pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Kleine‐Brueggeney

Greif

Schoettker

et al. 2016

British Journal of Anaesthesia

179

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many different types of VL have been developed in the last years [11] and their application in the clinical setting has been published [12, 13]. In particular, hyperangulated blades have been developed for visibility improvement, although good visibility is not automatically associated with an easy intubation process [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Trial to Compare Direct and Indirect Laryngoscopy Using C-MAC PM® with Macintosh Blade and D-Blade® in a Simulated Difficult Airway

Raimann

Dietze

Cuca

et al. 2019

Emergency Medicine International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. Evaluation of C-MAC PM® in combination with a standard Macintosh blade size 3 in direct and indirect laryngoscopy and D-Blade® in indirect laryngoscopy in a simulated difficult airway. Primary outcome was defined as the best view of the glottic structures. Secondary endpoints were subjective evaluation and assessment of the intubation process. Methods. Prospective monocentric, observational study on 48 adult patients without predictors for difficult laryngoscopy/tracheal intubation undergoing orthopedic surgery. Every participant preoperatively received a cervical collar to simulate a difficult airway. Direct and indirect laryngoscopy w/o the BURP maneuver with a standard Macintosh blade and indirect laryngoscopy w/o the BURP maneuver using D-Blade® were performed to evaluate if blade geometry and the BURP maneuver improve the glottic view as measured by the Cormack-Lehane score. Results. Using a C-MAC PM® laryngoscope, D-Blade® yielded improved glottic views compared with the Macintosh blade used with either the direct or indirect technique. Changing from direct laryngoscopy using a Macintosh blade to indirect videolaryngoscopy using C-MAC PM® with D-Blade® improved the Cormack-Lehane score from IIb, III, or IV to I or II in 31 cases. Conclusion. The combination of C-MAC PM® and D-Blade® significantly enhances the view of the glottis compared to direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh blade in patients with a simulated difficult airway. Trial Registration Number. This trial is registered under number NCT03403946.

show abstract

“…Gosbee et al (2001) report on a panel session on usability evaluation in a hospital context which identified issues including there not being the right training in place, a lack of management buy in, limitations in resource and difficulty integrating usability testing with existing purchasing processes. In other cases the assessment of technology has been held up by disagreement amongst clinical professions, and differences in opinion over evaluation methodology (Cook, 2012;Cook et al, 2012;Kinsella, 2013;Kinsella et al, 2012).…”

Section: The Role Of Usability In Purchasingmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do health service professionals consider human factors when purchasing interactive medical devices? A qualitative interview study

Vincent

Blandford

2017

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present findings of a UK study into how those involved in purchasing interactive medical devices go about evaluating usability, the challenges that arise, and opportunities for improvement. The study focused on procurement of infusion devices because these are used by various professionals across healthcare. A semi-structured interview study was carried out involving a range of stakeholders (20 in total) involved in or impacted by medical device procurement. Data was analysed using thematic analysis, a qualitative method designed to support the identification, analysis and reporting of patterns. In principle, health service purchasing was found to accommodate consideration of equipment usability. In practice, the evaluation process was driven primarily by engineering standards; assessment of local needs did not accommodate substantive assessment of usability; and choice was limited by the availability of equipment on the marketplace. We discuss ways in which purchasing could be improved through techniques that account for social circumstances.

show abstract

Introduction and evaluation of new airway devices: Current issues

Cited by 4 publications

References 30 publications

Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Prospective Trial to Compare Direct and Indirect Laryngoscopy Using C-MAC PM® with Macintosh Blade and D-Blade® in a Simulated Difficult Airway

How do health service professionals consider human factors when purchasing interactive medical devices? A qualitative interview study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About