Mcgrath Videolaryngoscope Versus Macintosh Laryngoscope in Patients With Manual In-line Stabilization

NCT03516539 | Unknown DMC

• 1 other identifier: 2017-I043
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 100
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Video laryngoscopy provides easily a good laryngeal view compared to direct laryngoscopy. It is particularly, useful in patients with anticipated difficult intubation, and also widely used for educational purposes. Among video laryngoscopy, Mcgrath is a recently-developed, portable video laryngoscopy with a liquid crystal display (LCD) monitor and disposable curved blade. Mcgrath is known to provide excellent laryngeal visibility even in case of anticipated-difficult and anticipated-unsuccessful intubation as well as normal airway management. However, compared with direct laryngoscopy, the success rate of intubation and the time required for anticipated difficult intubation have been reported conflicting results in previous studies. The aim of this study was to compare the intubation success rate, the intubation time and the ease of use with Mcgrath video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy during intubation.

Conditions

Anesthesia, General

Keywords

Videolaryngoscopy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Intubation success rate

  success or failure of intubation

  1 hour

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Time required for intubation

  1 hour

• Intubation difficulty score

  1 hour

• Complications

  1 day

Study Arms (2)

Group ML

EXPERIMENTAL

Mcgrath videolaryngoscopy

Device: Group ML

Group DL

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

direct Macintosh laryngoscope

Device: Group DL

Interventions

Group ML DEVICE

Mcgrath videolaryngoscope

Group ML

Group DL DEVICE

Macintosh laryngoscope

Group DL

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 19 Years - 70 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Patients scheduled for general anesthesia requiring tracheal intubation. Patients are aged 19 to 70 years and are American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I, II.

You may not qualify if:

• Patients requiring rapid sequence intubation Patients with poor teeth or high risk of aspiration pneumonia Cervical spine pathology, pharyngeal pathology

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Hallym University Medical Center: lead

Study Sites (1)

Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital

Anyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, 14068, South Korea

RECRUITING

Related Publications (4)

• Rai MR, Dering A, Verghese C. The Glidescope system: a clinical assessment of performance. Anaesthesia. 2005 Jan;60(1):60-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.04013.x.

  PMID: 15601274 BACKGROUND

• Asai T, Murao K, Shingu K. Training method of applying pressure on the neck for laryngoscopy: use of a videolaryngoscope. Anaesthesia. 2003 Jun;58(6):602-3. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2003.03207_7.x. No abstract available.

  PMID: 12846635 BACKGROUND

• Shippey B, Ray D, McKeown D. Case series: the McGrath videolaryngoscope--an initial clinical evaluation. Can J Anaesth. 2007 Apr;54(4):307-13. doi: 10.1007/BF03022777.

  PMID: 17400984 RESULT

• Shippey B, Ray D, McKeown D. Use of the McGrath videolaryngoscope in the management of difficult and failed tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth. 2008 Jan;100(1):116-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem303. Epub 2007 Oct 23.

  PMID: 17959584 RESULT

Study Officials

• Yi Hwa Choi, Dr

  Halllym university Sacred Hospital

  STUDY DIRECTOR

Central Study Contacts

Yi Hwa Choi, Dr.

CONTACT

82-31-380-3813; pcyhchoi@hallym.or.kr

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: DOUBLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: April 24, 2018
• First Posted: May 4, 2018
• Study Start: December 11, 2017
• Primary Completion: June 30, 2018
• Study Completion: July 7, 2018
• Last Updated: May 4, 2018

Record last verified: 2018-04

Locations

KR (1)