Comparision of endotracheal intubation between Smarttrach, C-MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes;A randomized prospective clinical trial
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Enrollment
- 375
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Primary:Compare the success rates and time for intubation (i.e the time in seconds from insertion of laryngoscopes to the appearance of square wave on capnogram)
Study Overview
Brief Summary
Macintosh laryngoscopes are commonly used for endo tracheal inubation. Video laryngoscopes are commonly used nowadays like CMAC and Smarttrach. We aim to compare the intubation characteristics of these three laryngoscopes in terms of their overall success rates, number of attempts, time taken, haemodnamic changes, need for external laryngeal manipulation and complications
Study Design
- Study Type
- Observational
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18.00 Year(s) to 65.00 Year(s) (—)
- Sex
- All
Inclusion Criteria
- •ASA I and II patients undergoing elective surgery.
Exclusion Criteria
- •Patient refusal Anticipated Difficult Airway ( Mallampatti Class III and IV, thyromental distance <6 cm; and inter-incisor distance <3.5 cm) Obesity( BMI >35) Increased intracranial pressure or cervical spine diseases cardiovascular disease endocrine disease presence of risk factors for gastric aspiration e.g. pregnancy, diabetes, etc.
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Primary:Compare the success rates and time for intubation (i.e the time in seconds from insertion of laryngoscopes to the appearance of square wave on capnogram)
Time Frame: ( the time in seconds from insertion of laryngoscopes to the appearance of square wave on capnogram) | Secondary:1) CL grading, need of optimization maneuvers, no.of attempts for successful placement, haemodynamic responses, Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) scale, subjective ease of intubation | 2) Complications like injury to the lips, teeth or tongue and any blood stain on the | device
Secondary:1) CL grading, need of optimization maneuvers, no.of attempts for successful placement, haemodynamic responses, Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) scale, subjective ease of intubation
Time Frame: ( the time in seconds from insertion of laryngoscopes to the appearance of square wave on capnogram) | Secondary:1) CL grading, need of optimization maneuvers, no.of attempts for successful placement, haemodynamic responses, Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) scale, subjective ease of intubation | 2) Complications like injury to the lips, teeth or tongue and any blood stain on the | device
2) Complications like injury to the lips, teeth or tongue and any blood stain on the
Time Frame: ( the time in seconds from insertion of laryngoscopes to the appearance of square wave on capnogram) | Secondary:1) CL grading, need of optimization maneuvers, no.of attempts for successful placement, haemodynamic responses, Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) scale, subjective ease of intubation | 2) Complications like injury to the lips, teeth or tongue and any blood stain on the | device
device
Time Frame: ( the time in seconds from insertion of laryngoscopes to the appearance of square wave on capnogram) | Secondary:1) CL grading, need of optimization maneuvers, no.of attempts for successful placement, haemodynamic responses, Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) scale, subjective ease of intubation | 2) Complications like injury to the lips, teeth or tongue and any blood stain on the | device
Secondary Outcomes
- 1) CL grading, need of optimization maneuvers, no.of attempts for successful ET placement, haemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy, Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) scale, subjective ease of intubation (VAS)(2) Complications like injury to the lips, teeth or tongue and any blood stain on the)