A Comparison of Two GlideScope Intubation Techniques

NCT01865643 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: 13-03
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 81
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The aim of this study is to compare the hemodynamic response to tracheal intubations using the standard technique versus the alternative GS intubation technique. As secondary outcomes the investigators will analyze procedure time, success rate and injury rate. The investigators hypothesize that the alternative intubation technique will have a shorter procedure time and lower injury rate when compared to the standard technique of GS intubation.

Conditions

Intubation, Endotracheal; Anesthesia, General

Keywords

Laryngoscopy; Intubation; Glidescope

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Hemodynamic response to tracheal intubation

  Heart rate and non-invasive blood pressure will be measured before induction, and throughout and after laryngoscopy and induction

  24 hours

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Procedure time

  10 minutes

• Success rate

  10 minutes

• Injury rate

  30 minutes

Study Arms (2)

Standard GlideScope intubation

OTHER

This standard GlideScope (GS) technique involves a midline larygoscopy followed by insertion of a styleted endotracheal tube, once an adequate view of the vocal cords is achieved.

Device: GlideScope

Alternative GlideScope intubation

EXPERIMENTAL

Alternative GlideScope (GS) intubation involves the insertion of the endotracheal tube under direct vision as a "fish hook" at the side of the mouth before the GS blade is introduced into the oropharynx.

Device: GlideScope

Interventions

GlideScope DEVICE

The GlideScope is used to assist with difficult tracheal intubation.

Alternative GlideScope intubation; Standard GlideScope intubation

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 65 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Patients of ASA physical status 1-2
• Patients aged 18 years and older
• Patients undergoing elective surgery that requires tracheal intubation

You may not qualify if:

• Patients in whom a rapid sequence intubation or alternative intubation method is indicated
• Patients with a known or suspected oral, pharyngeal or laryngeal mass
• Patients previously flagged as a difficult intubation
• Patients with hypertension (treated or untreated, poor dentition, symptomatic gastro-esophageal reflux or cervical spine instability

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital: lead

Study Sites (1)

Mount Sinai Hospital

Toronto, Ontario, M5G1X5, Canada

Location

Study Officials

• Zeev Friedman, MD

  MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: SUPPORTIVE CARE
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: May 28, 2013
• First Posted: May 31, 2013
• Study Start: May 1, 2013
• Primary Completion: May 1, 2014
• Study Completion: May 1, 2014
• Last Updated: August 21, 2014

Record last verified: 2014-08

Locations

CA (1)