Comparison of the Video and Macintosh Laryngoscope in Patients Who May be Difficult to Intubate
A Comparison of Laryngoscopy Techniques Using the Video Laryngoscope and the Traditional Macintosh Laryngoscope in Patients Who May be Difficult to Intubate
1 other identifier
interventional
200
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to determine if the Video Laryngoscope (VL) is a useful instrument in patients at risk for difficult intubation. We will compare this device to the traditional Macintosh Laryngoscope.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for phase_4
Started Aug 2003
Longer than P75 for phase_4
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
August 1, 2003
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
September 12, 2005
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
September 15, 2005
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
February 1, 2007
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
February 1, 2007
CompletedMarch 23, 2016
March 1, 2016
3.5 years
September 12, 2005
March 22, 2016
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
5 scale score of glottic view; Time and number of attempts required; Level of difficulty; Degree of irritation of the pharynx, epiglottis, and aryteniods
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Vital signs, oxygen saturation, and end-tidal carbon dioxide
Interventions
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Age 18-80
- ASA I-III
- Presenting for elective surgery
- Requires general anesthesia
- Present as a possible difficult intubation (one or more of the following)
- history of difficult intubations
- morbid obesity
- small mouth opening (\<3 fingerbreadths)
- limited neck mobility
- Mallampati classes II-III
- short thyromental distance (\<6 cm)
You may not qualify if:
- Determined to be easily intubated (none of the factors listed above)
- Considered so difficult (i.e. Mallampati IV) that an awake intubation should be performed
- ASA IV and V
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Memorial Hermann Hospital
Houston, Texas, 77030, United States
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Carin A. Hagberg, M.D.
The University of Texas Medical School at Houston
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 4
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Professor and Chairman, Joseph C. Gable, M.D., Endowed Chair
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
September 12, 2005
First Posted
September 15, 2005
Study Start
August 1, 2003
Primary Completion
February 1, 2007
Study Completion
February 1, 2007
Last Updated
March 23, 2016
Record last verified: 2016-03