ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound (US) may have an emerging role as an adjunct in verification of endotracheal intubation. Obtaining optimal US images in obese patients is generally regarded more difficult than for other patients. This study compared the time consumption of bilateral lung US with auscultation and capnography for verifying endotracheal intubation in obese patients. METHODS: A prospective, paired and investigator-blinded study performed in the operating theatre. Twenty-four adult patients requiring endotracheal intubation for bariatric surgery were included. During post-intubation bag ventilation, bilateral lung US was performed for detection of lungsliding indicating lung ventilation simultaneous with capnography and auscultation of epigastrium and chest. Primary outcome measure was the time difference to confirmed endotracheal intubation between US and auscultation alone. The secondary outcome measure was time difference between US and auscultation combined with capnography. RESULTS: Both methods verified endotracheal tube placement in all patients. No significant difference was found between US compared with auscultation alone. Median time for verification by auscultation alone was 47.5 s [interquartile (IQR) 40-51 s], with a mean difference of -0.3 s in favor of US (95% confidence interval -3.5-2.9 s) P = 0.87. Comparing US with the combination of auscultation and capnography, there was a significant difference between the two methods. Median time for verification by US was 43 s (IQR 40-51 s) vs. 55 s (IQR 46-65 s), P < 0.0001. CONCLUSION: In obese patients, verification of endotracheal tube placement with US is as fast as auscultation alone and faster than the standard method of auscultation and capnography.
Subject(s)
Auscultation/methods , Capnography/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Obesity/complications , Adult , Anesthesia, General , Bariatric Surgery , Female , Humans , Laryngoscopy , Male , Middle Aged , Nurse Anesthetists , Obesity/diagnostic imaging , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Sample Size , Treatment Outcome , UltrasonographyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study compared the time consumption of bilateral lung ultrasound with auscultation and capnography for verifying endotracheal intubation. METHODS: A prospective, paired, and investigator-blinded study carried out in the operating theatre. Twenty-five adult patients requiring endotracheal intubation were included. During intubation, transtracheal ultrasound was performed to visualize passage of the endotracheal tube. During bag ventilation, bilateral lung ultrasound was performed for the detection of lung sliding as a sign of ventilation simultaneous with capnography and auscultation of the epigastrium and chest. Primary outcome measure was time difference to confirmed endotracheal intubation between ultrasound and auscultation alone. Secondary outcome measure was time difference between ultrasound and auscultation combined with capnography. RESULTS: Both methods verified endotracheal tube placement in all patients. In 68% of patients, endotracheal tube placement was visualized by real-time transtracheal ultrasound. Comparing ultrasound with the combination of auscultation and capnography, there was a significant difference between the two methods. Median time for ultrasound was 40 s [interquartile range (IQR) 35-48 s] vs. 48 s (IQR 45-53 s), P < 0.0001. Mean difference was -7.1 s in favour of ultrasound [95% confidence interval (CI) -9.4--4.8 s]. No significant difference was found between ultrasound compared with auscultation alone. Median time for auscultation alone was 42 s (IQR 37-47 s), P = 0.6, with a mean difference of -0.88 s in favour of ultrasound (95% CI -4.2-2.5 s). CONCLUSIONS: Verification of endotracheal tube placement with ultrasound is as fast as auscultation alone and faster than the standard method of auscultation and capnography.
Subject(s)
Auscultation/methods , Capnography/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Trachea/diagnostic imaging , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anesthesia, Inhalation , Body Mass Index , Confidence Intervals , Female , Humans , Laryngoscopy , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Sample Size , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Ultrasonography , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The quality of external chest compressions (ECC) is influenced by the surface supporting the patient. The aim of this study was to compare chest compression depth with and without a rigid backboard. The authors hypothesized that the presence of a backboard would result in an increased depth of chest compressions. METHODS: A randomized, double-blinded, cross-over trial. We simulated in-hospital cardiac arrest using a resuscitation manikin placed in a standard hospital bed. In total, 23 hospital orderlies were randomly assigned to perform ECC for 2 min on two identical ResusciAnne manikins, under one of which a rigid backboard had been placed. Data were recorded using the Laerdal PC-Skill Reporting System. RESULTS: Mean chest compression depth increased from 43 to 48 mm (P < 0.0001) when a backboard was present (mean difference 5 mm, 95% CI 3.6-7.5 mm, SD 4.6). There was a significant increase in mean proportion of compressions >40 mm when using a backboard Mean 92% vs. 69%, P= 0.0007). No difference was found between the two groups in the following variables: duty cycle, compression rate, mean proportion of compressions of correct depth (40-50 mm) or proportion of compressions with incomplete release. CONCLUSIONS: Applying a backboard significantly increases depth of chest compressions during cardiopulmonary resuscitation when performed on a manikin model.
