A randomized controlled trial comparing three supraglottic airway devices used as a conduit to facilitate tracheal intubation with flexible bronchoscopy.

PURPOSE: Once difficult ventilation and intubation are declared, guidelines suggest the use of a supraglottic airway (SGA) as a rescue device to ventilate and, if oxygenation is restored, subsequently as an intubation conduit. Nevertheless, few trials have formally studied recent SGA devices in patients. Our objective was to compare the efficacy of three second-generation SGA devices as conduits for bronchoscopy-guided endotracheal intubation. METHODS: In this prospective, single-blinded three-arm randomized controlled trial, patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status of I-III undergoing general anesthesia were randomized to bronchoscopy-guided endotracheal intubation using AuraGain™, Air-Q® Blocker, or i-gel® devices. We excluded patients with contraindications to an SGA or drugs and who were pregnant or had a neck, spine, or respiratory anomaly. The primary outcome was intubation time, measured from SGA circuit disconnection to CO2 measurement. Secondary outcomes included ease, time, and success of SGA insertion; success of intubation on first attempt; overall intubation success; number of attempts to intubate; ease of intubation; and ease of SGA removals. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty patients were enrolled from March 2017 to January 2018. Median intubation times were similar across the three groups (Air-Q Blocker, 44 sec; AuraGain, 45 sec; i-gel, 36 sec; P = 0.08). The i-gel was faster to insert (i-gel: 10 sec; Air-Q Blocker, 16 sec; AuraGain, 16 sec; P < 0.001) and easier to insert (Air-Q Blocker vs i-gel, P = 0.001; AuraGain vs i-gel, P = 0.002). Success of SGA insertion, success of intubation, and number of attempts were similar. The Air-Q Blocker was easier to remove than the i-gel (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: All three second-generation SGA devices performed similarly regarding intubation. Despite minor benefits of the i-gel, clinicians should select their SGA based on clinical experience. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02975466); registered on 29 November 2016.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Une fois qu'une ventilation et une intubation difficiles sont déclarées, les lignes directrices préconisent le recours à un dispositif supraglottique comme modalité de sauvetage pour ventiler le patient et, si l'oxygénation est rétablie, être ensuite utilisé comme conduit d'intubation. Toutefois, peu d'études ont formellement analysé l'utilisation des dispositifs supraglottiques récents chez de véritbales patients. Notre objectif était de comparer l'efficacité de trois dispositifs supraglottiques de deuxième génération utilisés comme conduits pour l'intubation endotrachéale guidée par bronchoscopie. MéTHODE: Dans cette étude prospective randomisée contrôlée à trois bras et à simple insu, les patients de statut physique I-III selon l'American Society of Anesthesiologists bénéficiant d'une anesthésie générale ont été randomisés à recevoir une intubation endotrachéale guidée par bronchoscopie via les dispositifs AuraGain™, Air-Q® Blocker ou i-gel®. Nous avons exclu les patients présentant des contre-indications à l'utilisation d'un dispositif supraglottique ou aux médicaments, ainsi que les patientes enceintes et les patients présentant une anomalie au niveau du cou, de la colonne vertébrale ou des voies aériennes. Le critère d'évaluation principal était le temps d'intubation mesuré entre le moment de déconnexion du dispositif supraglottique du circuit et le moment de mesure du CO2. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient la facilité, le délai et la réussite de l'insertion du dispositif supraglottique; la réussite de l'intubation à la première tentative; la réussite globale de l'intubation; le nombre de tentatives d'intubation; la facilité d'intubation; et la facilité de retrait du dispositif supraglottique. RéSULTATS: Cent cinquante patients ont été recrutés de mars 2017 à janvier 2018. Les délais d'intubation médians étaient similaires dans les trois groupes (Air-Q Blocker : 44 sec; AuraGain : 45 sec; i-gel : 36 sec; P = 0,08). L'i-gel était plus rapide à insérer (i-gel : 10 sec; Air-Q Blocker : 16 sec; AuraGain : 16 sec; P < 0,001) et plus facile à insérer (Air-Q Blocker vs i-gel : P = 0,001; AuraGain vs i-gel : P = 0,002). La réussite de l'insertion du dispositif supraglottique, la réussite de l'intubation et le nombre de tentatives étaient similaires. L'Air-Q Blocker était plus facile à retirer que l'i-gel (P < 0,001). CONCLUSION: Les trois dispositifs supraglottiques de deuxième génération ont tous affiché une performance similaire en matière d'intubation. Malgré des avantages mineurs de l'i-gel, les cliniciens devraient choisir leur dispositif supraglottique en fonction de leur expérience clinique. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02975466); enregistrée le 29 novembre 2016.

Gaps in Indigenous disadvantage not closing: a census cohort study of social determinants of health in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand from 1981-2006.

BACKGROUND: Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are all developed nations that are home to Indigenous populations which have historically faced poorer outcomes than their non-Indigenous counterparts on a range of health, social, and economic measures. The past several decades have seen major efforts made to close gaps in health and social determinants of health for Indigenous persons. We ask whether relative progress toward these goals has been achieved. METHODS: We used census data for each country to compare outcomes for the cohort aged 25-29 years at each census year 1981-2006 in the domains of education, employment, and income. RESULTS: The percentage-point gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous persons holding a bachelor degree or higher qualification ranged from 6.6% (New Zealand) to 10.9% (Canada) in 1981, and grew wider over the period to range from 19.5% (New Zealand) to 25.2% (Australia) in 2006. The unemployment rate gap ranged from 5.4% (Canada) to 16.9% (Australia) in 1981, and fluctuated over the period to range from 6.6% (Canada) to 11.0% (Australia) in 2006. Median Indigenous income as a proportion of non-Indigenous median income (whereby parity = 100%) ranged from 77.2% (New Zealand) to 45.2% (Australia) in 1981, and improved slightly over the period to range from 80.9% (Canada) to 54.4% (Australia) in 2006. CONCLUSIONS: Australia, Canada, and New Zealand represent nations with some of the highest levels of human development in the world. Relative to their non-Indigenous populations, their Indigenous populations were almost as disadvantaged in 2006 as they were in 1981 in the employment and income domains, and more disadvantaged in the education domain. New approaches for closing gaps in social determinants of health are required if progress on achieving equity is to improve.

Potential years of life lost at ages 25 to 74 among Métis and non-Status Indians, 1991 to 2001.

BACKGROUND: Aboriginal peoples experience a disproportionate burden of disease, compared with other Canadians. However, relatively little information is available about mortality among Métis and non-Status Indians. METHODS: This study calculates potential years of life lost before age 75 (PYLL) for people aged 25 to 74 by all-cause and cause-specific mortality, and examines the effect of socio-economic factors on premature mortality. Age-specific and age-standardized PYLL rates were calculated for 11,600 Métis, 5,400 non-Status Indians, and 2,475,700 non-Aboriginal adults based on the number of person-years at risk up to age 75. RESULTS: Métis and non-Status Indian adults had about twice the risk of dying before age 75, compared with non-Aboriginal adults. While the largest percentage of PYLL was due to non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular disease and cancer, relative and absolute inequalities were greatest for injuries. Socioeconomic indicators such as income, education and employment explained a large share of the disparities in premature mortality. INTERPRETATION: The results highlight the losses of potential years of life due to chronic diseases, as well as the possible importance of injury prevention programs for Métis and non-Status Indians.

Birth outcomes in the Inuit-inhabited areas of Canada.

BACKGROUND: Information on health disparities between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations is essential for developing public health programs aimed at reducing such disparities. The lack of data on disparities in birth outcomes between Inuit and non-Inuit populations in Canada prompted us to compare birth outcomes in Inuit-inhabited areas with those in the rest of the country and in other rural and northern areas of Canada. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of all births in Canada during 1990-2000 using linked vital data. We identified 13,642 births to residents of Inuit-inhabited areas and 4,054,489 births to residents of all other areas. The primary outcome measures were preterm birth, stillbirth and infant death. RESULTS: Compared with the rest of Canada, Inuit-inhabited areas had substantially higher rates of preterm birth (risk ratio [RR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-1.52), stillbirth (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.38-2.04) and infant death (RR 3.61, 95% CI 3.17-4.12). The risk ratios and absolute differences in risk for these outcomes changed little over time. Excess mortality was observed for all major causes of infant death, including congenital anomalies (RR 1.64), immaturity-related conditions (RR 2.96), asphyxia (RR 2.43), sudden infant death syndrome (RR 7.15), infection (RR 8.32) and external causes (RR 7.30). Maternal characteristics accounted for only a small part of the risk disparities. Substantial risk ratios for preterm birth, stillbirth and infant death remained when the comparisons were restricted to other rural or northern areas of Canada. INTERPRETATION: The Inuit-inhabited areas had much higher rates of preterm birth, stillbirth and infant death compared with the rest of Canada and with other rural and northern areas. There is an urgent need for more effective interventions to improve maternal and infant health in Inuit-inhabited areas.

Mortality of Métis and registered Indian adults in Canada: an 11-year follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Little information has been published about the mortality of the Métis people of Canada. This study describes mortality patterns among Métis and Registered Indian adults, compared with the non-Aboriginal population. DATA SOURCE AND METHODS: The 1991 to 2001 Canadian census mortality followup study tracked mortality among a 15% sample of respondents aged 25 or older, including 11,800 Métis, 56,700 Registered Indians and 2,624,300 non-Aboriginal adults, all of whom were enumerated by the 1991 census long-form questionnaire. Age-specific and age-standardized mortality rates and period life tables based on the number of person-years at risk were calculated across the various groups. Métis were defined by ethnic origin (ancestry). RESULTS: Compared with non-Aboriginal members of the cohort, life expectancy at age 25 was 3.3 and 5.5 years shorter for Métis men and women, respectively, and 4.4 and 6.3 years shorter for Registered Indians. For both Aboriginal groups, mortality rate ratios were highest at younger ages. Mortality rate differences among Métis men were particularly elevated for external causes and circulatory, respiratory and digestive system diseases; among Métis women, for circulatory system diseases, cancers, and digestive and respiratory system diseases. Generally, rate differences for Registered Indian men and women were further elevated. CONCLUSIONS: Métis adults had higher mortality rates compared with non-Aboriginal members of the cohort, but lower rates than did Registered Indians.

Life expectancy in the Inuit-inhabited areas of Canada, 1989 to 2003.

OBJECTIVES: Because of a lack of Aboriginal identifiers on death registrations, standard data sources and methods cannot be used to estimate basic health indicators for Inuit in Canada. Instead, a geographic-based approach was used to estimate life expectancy for the entire population of Inuit-inhabited areas. DATA SOURCES: The data are from the Canadian Mortality Database and the Census of Canada. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: Areas where at least 33% of residents were Inuit were identified, based on census results. Vital statistics death records for 1989 through 2003 and census population counts for 1991, 1996 and 2001 were used to compute abridged life tables for the Inuit-inhabited areas in each of the three 5-year periods centered around those census years. MAIN RESULTS: In 1991, life expectancy at birth in the Inuit-inhabited areas was about 68 years, which was 10 years lower than for Canada overall. From 1991 to 2001, life expectancy in the Inuit-inhabited areas did not increase, although it rose by about two years for Canada as a whole. As a result, the gap widened to more than 12 years. Life expectancy in the Inuit-inhabited areas was generally highest in the Inuvialuit region (Northwest Territories) and Nunavut (Territory), followed by Nunatsiavut (Labrador) and Nunavik (Quebec). While these results are not specific to the Inuit population, such geographic-based methods can be used with any administrative datasets that include postal codes or municipal-level locality codes.

The changing well-being of older adult registered Indians: an analysis using the Registered Indian Human Development Index.

The demographic aging of the Registered Indian population suggests that the social, economic, and health conditions of older Registered Indians will be increasingly important for communities and policymakers. We have adapted the United Nations Development Program's Human Development Index using data from the Census of Canada and the Indian Register to measure whether improvements seen in the knowledge, standard of living, and health of the Registered Indian population between 1981 and 2001 are also observed among Registered Indians of older ages. The absolute levels of well-being of older Registered Indians were found to have improved, but gaps with other older Canadians had widened, particularly in terms of income and male life expectancy.

Indigenous well-being in four countries: an application of the UNDP'S human development index to indigenous peoples in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States.

BACKGROUND: Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand consistently place near the top of the United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Index (HDI) rankings, yet all have minority Indigenous populations with much poorer health and social conditions than non-Indigenous peoples. It is unclear just how the socioeconomic and health status of Indigenous peoples in these countries has changed in recent decades, and it remains generally unknown whether the overall conditions of Indigenous peoples are improving and whether the gaps between Indigenous peoples and other citizens have indeed narrowed. There is unsettling evidence that they may not have. It was the purpose of this study to determine how these gaps have narrowed or widened during the decade 1990 to 2000. METHODS: Census data and life expectancy estimates from government sources were used to adapt the Human Development Index (HDI) to examine how the broad social, economic, and health status of Indigenous populations in these countries have changed since 1990. Three indices - life expectancy, educational attainment, and income - were combined into a single HDI measure. RESULTS: Between 1990 and 2000, the HDI scores of Indigenous peoples in North America and New Zealand improved at a faster rate than the general populations, closing the gap in human development. In Australia, the HDI scores of Indigenous peoples decreased while the general populations improved, widening the gap in human development. While these countries are considered to have high human development according to the UNDP, the Indigenous populations that reside within them have only medium levels of human development. CONCLUSION: The inconsistent progress in the health and well-being of Indigenous populations over time, and relative to non-Indigenous populations, points to the need for further efforts to improve the social, economic, and physical health of Indigenous peoples.