Indirect Laryngoscopy for Nasal Intubation
Indirect Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Routine Nasotracheal Intubation: a Pilot Study
1 other identifier
interventional
N/A
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Comparison of ease and convenience of nasotracheal intubation with the use of the two indirect laryngoscopes, Airtraq or Glidescope, versus the traditionally used Macintosh laryngoscope.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
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
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
May 28, 2009
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
May 29, 2009
CompletedMay 29, 2009
May 1, 2009
May 28, 2009
May 28, 2009
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS)
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Posture of the intubator
Study Arms (3)
Airtraq
ACTIVE COMPARATORGlidescope
ACTIVE COMPARATORMacintosh
ACTIVE COMPARATORInterventions
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- nasotracheal intubation
You may not qualify if:
- anticipated difficult airway
- risk factors for gastric aspiration
- history of bleeding
- relevant allergy
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
General Hospital Linz
Linz, 4020, Austria
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 4
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
May 28, 2009
First Posted
May 29, 2009
Last Updated
May 29, 2009
Record last verified: 2009-05