Comparison of two video laryngoscopes in patients undergoing tracheal intubation with cervical spine immobilizatio
Phase 1
Completed
- Conditions
- Health Condition 1: null- ASA I and ASA IIAge between 18-65 yearsMallampati Class I, II and III
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2018/05/014068
- Lead Sponsor
- Artemis Health Institute
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Completed
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 60
Inclusion Criteria
ASA I and ASA II
Mallampati class I, II and III
Exclusion Criteria
Anticipated difficult airway (Mallampati class IV, thyromental distance <6 cm,
interincisor gap <3.5 cm).
Presence of risk factor for gastric aspiration e.g. pregnancy.
Uncontrolled hypertension and diabetes mellitus, cardiac disease, hepatic and renal
impairment.
Loose teeth and artificial dentures.
BMI > 35.
Oral pathology.
CNS disorder.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method IDS score was less in King Vision ® (1.63±1.25) as compared to Truview ® <br/ ><br>EVO2 (2.03±1.38). But the difference between King Vision and Truview ® <br/ ><br>EVO2 groups were not statistically significant.Timepoint: During laryngoscopy and intubation
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Mean duration of intubation was significantly longer in Truview® EVO2 group as compared to King Vision®. <br/ ><br>Haemodynamic parameters (HR, MAP, Spo2) were comparable in both groups with no statistical significant difference. <br/ ><br>No major complication in any of the groups.Timepoint: During laryngoscopy and intubation and 5 minutes post intubation.