Effect of the use of a video laryngoscope and bougie on the performance of endotracheal intubation on the ground by novice prehospital caregivers: a randomized simulation study

ABSTRACT

Objective@#This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a bougie and glidescope video laryngoscope (GVL) for ground intubation by novice prehospital caregivers. We hypothesized that the intubation outcome using a bougie or GVL was superior to that using the Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL) with a stylet (MCLS) in ground intubation. @*Methods@#A randomized crossover manikin study was conducted. Studied groups were categorized into 4 according to the intubation devices used; MCLS, Macintosh laryngoscope with bougie (MCLB), glidescope video laryngoscope with a stylet (GVLS), and glidescope video laryngoscope with bougie (GVLB). The primary outcome was the total endotracheal intubation time and the secondary outcome was the success rate for endotracheal intubation. @*Results@#The use of a bougie did not cause a significant difference in the intubation time (MCLS vs. MCLB, P=0.213; GVLS vs. GVLB, P=0.633) and the success rate of endotracheal intubation (MCLS vs. MCLB, P>0.990; GVLS vs. GVLB, P=0.077) was compared with the use of a stylet in MCL and GVL. The use of GVL showed a longer endotracheal intubation time compared with MCLS (MCLS vs. GVLS, P<0.001; MCLS vs. GVLB, P<0.001). GVLB showed a decreased success rate of endotracheal intubation compared with the use of MCL (MCLS vs. GVLB, P=0.004; MCLB vs. GVLB, P<0.001). @*Conclusion@#The use of the GVL and a bougie could not affect the performance of endotracheal intubation on the ground. The use of MCL and a stylet for ground intubation could increase the intubation success rate and shorten intubation time compared with the use of a bougie or the use of GVL.