Analysis of tracheal intubation in out-of-hospital helicopter emergency medicine recorded by video laryngoscopy.
Airway
HEMS
Intubation
Prehospital emergency medicine
Videolaryngoscopy
Journal
Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine
ISSN: 1757-7241
Titre abrégé: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101477511
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Mar 2021
17 Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
07
12
2020
accepted:
04
03
2021
entrez:
18
3
2021
pubmed:
19
3
2021
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Tracheal intubation remains the gold standard of airway management in emergency medicine and maximizing safety, intubation success, and especially first-pass intubation success (FPS) in these situations is imperative. We conducted a prospective observational study on all 12 helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) bases of the Swiss Air Rescue, between February 15, 2018, and February 14, 2019. All 428 patients on whom out-of-hospital advanced airway management was performed by the HEMS crew were included. The C-MAC video laryngoscope was used as the primary device for tracheal intubation. Intubation procedures were recorded by the video laryngoscope and precise time points were recorded to verify the time necessary for each attempt and the overall procedure time until successful intubation. The videos were further analysed for problems and complications during airway management by an independent reviewer. Additionally, a questionnaire about the intubation procedure, basic characteristics of the patient, circumstances, environmental factors, and the provider's level of experience in airway management was filled out. Main outcome measures were FPS of tracheal intubation, overall success rate, overall intubation time, problems and complications of video laryngoscopy. FPS rate was 87.6% and overall success rate 98.6%. Success rates, overall time to intubation, and subjective difficulty were not associated to the providers' expertise in airway management. In patients undergoing CPR FPS was 84.8%, in trauma patients 86.4% and in non-trauma patients 93.3%. FPS in patients with difficult airway characteristics, facial trauma/burns or obesity ranges between 87 and 89%. Performing airway management indoors or inside an ambulance resulted in a significantly higher FPS of 91.1% compared to outdoor locations (p < 0.001). Direct solar irradiation on the screen, fogging of the lens, and blood on the camera significantly impaired FPS. Several issues for further improvements in the use of video laryngoscopy in the out-of-hospital setting and for quality control in airway management were identified. Airway management using the C-MAC video laryngoscope with Macintosh blade in a group of operators with mixed experience showed high FPS and overall rates of intubation success. Video recording emergency intubations may improve education and quality control.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Tracheal intubation remains the gold standard of airway management in emergency medicine and maximizing safety, intubation success, and especially first-pass intubation success (FPS) in these situations is imperative.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a prospective observational study on all 12 helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) bases of the Swiss Air Rescue, between February 15, 2018, and February 14, 2019. All 428 patients on whom out-of-hospital advanced airway management was performed by the HEMS crew were included. The C-MAC video laryngoscope was used as the primary device for tracheal intubation. Intubation procedures were recorded by the video laryngoscope and precise time points were recorded to verify the time necessary for each attempt and the overall procedure time until successful intubation. The videos were further analysed for problems and complications during airway management by an independent reviewer. Additionally, a questionnaire about the intubation procedure, basic characteristics of the patient, circumstances, environmental factors, and the provider's level of experience in airway management was filled out. Main outcome measures were FPS of tracheal intubation, overall success rate, overall intubation time, problems and complications of video laryngoscopy.
RESULTS
RESULTS
FPS rate was 87.6% and overall success rate 98.6%. Success rates, overall time to intubation, and subjective difficulty were not associated to the providers' expertise in airway management. In patients undergoing CPR FPS was 84.8%, in trauma patients 86.4% and in non-trauma patients 93.3%. FPS in patients with difficult airway characteristics, facial trauma/burns or obesity ranges between 87 and 89%. Performing airway management indoors or inside an ambulance resulted in a significantly higher FPS of 91.1% compared to outdoor locations (p < 0.001). Direct solar irradiation on the screen, fogging of the lens, and blood on the camera significantly impaired FPS. Several issues for further improvements in the use of video laryngoscopy in the out-of-hospital setting and for quality control in airway management were identified.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Airway management using the C-MAC video laryngoscope with Macintosh blade in a group of operators with mixed experience showed high FPS and overall rates of intubation success. Video recording emergency intubations may improve education and quality control.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33731197
doi: 10.1186/s13049-021-00863-9
pii: 10.1186/s13049-021-00863-9
pmc: PMC7968290
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
49Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2012 Apr-Jun;16(2):293-8
pubmed: 22191806
Br J Anaesth. 2014 Aug;113(2):220-5
pubmed: 25038154
Anaesthesist. 2015 Dec;64 Suppl 1:27-40
pubmed: 26727936
Br J Anaesth. 2018 May;120(5):1103-1109
pubmed: 29661387
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2016 May-Jun;20(3):333-42
pubmed: 26848072
Anaesthesia. 2019 Sep;74(9):1158-1164
pubmed: 31069782
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012 Feb;56(2):164-71
pubmed: 22060976
Anesth Analg. 2015 Nov;121(5):1389-93
pubmed: 26484464
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Jun;32(6):425-31
pubmed: 25886716
Anaesthesia. 2018 Mar;73(3):348-355
pubmed: 29315473
Unfallchirurg. 2016 Jun;119(6):501-7
pubmed: 25135707
Crit Care Med. 2011 Mar;39(3):489-93
pubmed: 21169822
Anesth Analg. 2009 Aug;109(2):303-5
pubmed: 19608796
Ann Emerg Med. 2012 Dec;60(6):739-48
pubmed: 22560464
Resuscitation. 2016 Aug;105:196-202
pubmed: 27095126
Anaesthesia. 2011 Dec;66(12):1101-5
pubmed: 21883131
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 15;11:CD011136
pubmed: 27844477
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2016 Jun 13;24:84
pubmed: 27297563
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2014 Feb 03;22:10
pubmed: 24484856
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013 Jul 25;21:58
pubmed: 23883447
Resuscitation. 2015 Apr;89:188-94
pubmed: 25541427
Anaesthesia. 2015 Mar;70(3):290-5
pubmed: 25271442
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2020 Aug 21;:
pubmed: 32833853
Crit Care Med. 2016 Jul;44(7):e470-6
pubmed: 27002277
Acad Emerg Med. 2013 Jan;20(1):71-8
pubmed: 23574475
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2016 Dec;33(12):943-948
pubmed: 27533711
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2019 Jan 21;27(1):6
pubmed: 30665441