Comparison of Efficiency Between I-gel Blind Intubation and I-gel Bronchoscopic Intubation During Resuscitation
Not Applicable
Completed
- Conditions
- Heart Arrest
- Registration Number
- NCT02411422
- Lead Sponsor
- Hallym University Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital
- Brief Summary
The investigators will compare conventional intubation using Macintosh laryngoscope, blind endotracheal intubation using i-gel for conduit and bronchoscopic intubation using Ambu-aScope and i-gel. All situation assumed as cardiac arrest. i.e, someone give chest compressions continuously without interruption.
Moreover the investigators will compare the type of endotracheal tube. Reinforced tube has more soft tube tip, so the investigators think it is more acceptable for intubation using i-gel as conduit.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 23
Inclusion Criteria
- emergency physician
- work at emergency department more than 1 year.
- 50 or more experience of endotracheal intubation
Exclusion Criteria
- having backache or wrist pain
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- CROSSOVER
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method intubation time 1 Day 1st intubation attempt, an expected average time is 1 min.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method success rate for intubation 1 Day the rate for successful 1st intubation
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital
🇰🇷Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Korea, Republic of
Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital🇰🇷Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Korea, Republic of