Barrier Enclosure during Endotracheal Intubation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Canelli R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7151333 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Barrier Enclosure during Endotracheal Intubation.
Canelli Robert R Connor Christopher W CW Gonzalez Mauricio M Nozari Ala A Ortega Rafael R
The New England journal of medicine 20200403 20
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7236714 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9553218 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has created serious challenges to anesthesiologists. As hospitalized patients' respiratory function deteriorates, many will require endotracheal intubation. Airway management of infected patients risks aerosolization of viral-loaded droplets that pose serious hazards to the anesthesiologist and all health care personnel present. The addition of an enclosure barrier during airway management minimizes the hazard by entrapping the droplets and possibly the aerosols within an enclosed space adding additional protection for health care workers. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of different barrier enclosure techniques during tracheal intubation and extubation.
| S-EPMC7302074 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endotracheal intubation poses high risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and other respiratory pathogens. We designed and here describe a protective drape that we believe will greatly reduce this risk. Unlike the intubation box that has been described prior, it is portable, disposable, and does not restrict operator dexterity. We have used it extensively and successfully during the height of the corona virus disease of 2019 outbreak.
| S-EPMC7333628 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeNovel devices such as the barrier enclosure were developed in hopes of improving provider safety by limiting SARS-CoV-2 transmission during tracheal intubation. Nevertheless, concerns arose regarding a lack of rigorous efficacy and safety data for these devices. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of the barrier enclosure on time to tracheal intubation.MethodAfter Research Ethics Board approval, elective surgical patients with normal airway predictors were randomly allocated 1:1 to tracheal intubation with or without a barrier enclosure. The primary outcome was time to tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes included first-pass success rate, total time of airway manipulation, anesthesiologists' perception of intubation difficulty, likelihood of use in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, and patients' perception of comfort and acceptability.ResultsThere were 48 participants in the barrier enclosure group and 46 participants in the control group. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) time to tracheal intubation was 62 (29) sec with barrier closure and 53 (27) sec without barrier enclosure (mean difference, 9 sec; 95% confidence interval, - 3 to 20; P = 0.14). Anesthesiologists rated the difficulty of intubation higher with barrier enclosure (mean [SD] visual analogue scale score, 27 [26] mm vs 9 [17] mm; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in other secondary outcomes.ConclusionIn healthy surgical patients with normal airway predictors, the use of a barrier enclosure during tracheal intubation did not significantly prolong time to intubation or decrease first-pass intubation success. Nevertheless, there was an increase in difficulty of intubation perceived by the anesthesiologists with use of a barrier enclosure.Trial registrationwww.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04366141); registered 28 April 2020.
| S-EPMC8109846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesAirway management during in-hospital cardiac arrest represents a fundamental component of resuscitative efforts, yet little is known about temporal trends in intubation during in-hospital cardiac arrest. Our objective was to investigate changes in in-hospital cardiac arrest airway management over time and in response to national guideline updates.DesignObservational cohort study of a prospectively collected database.SettingMulticenter study of hospitals participating in the "Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation" registry from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2018.SubjectsAdult patients who experienced an in-hospital cardiac arrest and did not have an invasive airway in place prior to the arrest.InterventionsThe primary outcome was the rate of intra-arrest intubation from 2001 to 2018. We constructed multivariable regression models with generalized estimating equations to determine the annual adjusted odds of intubation. We also assessed the timing of intubation relative to the onset of pulselessness and other arrest measures. We used an interrupted time-series analysis to assess the association between the 2010 Advanced Cardiac Life Support guideline update and intubation rates.Measurements and main resultsOne thousand sixty-six eight hundred patients from 797 hospitals were included. From 2001 to 2018, the percentage of patients intubated during an arrest decreased from 69% to 55% for all rhythms, 73% to 60% for nonshockable rhythms, and 58% to 36% for shockable rhythms (p < 0.001 for trend for all 3 groups). The median time from onset of pulselessness to intubation increased from 5 minutes in 2001 (interquartile range, 2-8 min) to 6 minutes in 2018 (interquartile range, 4-10 min) (p < 0.001 for trend). Following the 2010 guideline update, there was a downward step change and a steeper decrease over time in the rate of intubation as compared to the preintervention period (p < 0.001).ConclusionsEndotracheal intubation rates during in-hospital cardiac arrest have decreased significantly over time, with a more substantial decline following the updated 2010 guideline that prioritized chest compressions over airway management.
| S-EPMC9004511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RationaleHypoxemia is common during endotracheal intubation of critically ill patients and may predispose to cardiac arrest and death. Administration of supplemental oxygen during laryngoscopy (apneic oxygenation) may prevent hypoxemia.ObjectivesTo determine if apneic oxygenation increases the lowest arterial oxygen saturation experienced by patients undergoing endotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit.MethodsThis was a randomized, open-label, pragmatic trial in which 150 adults undergoing endotracheal intubation in a medical intensive care unit were randomized to receive 15 L/min of 100% oxygen via high-flow nasal cannula during laryngoscopy (apneic oxygenation) or no supplemental oxygen during laryngoscopy (usual care). The primary outcome was lowest arterial oxygen saturation between induction and 2 minutes after completion of endotracheal intubation.Measurements and main resultsMedian lowest arterial oxygen saturation was 92% with apneic oxygenation versus 90% with usual care (95% confidence interval for the difference, -1.6 to 7.4%; P = 0.16). There was no difference between apneic oxygenation and usual care in incidence of oxygen saturation less than 90% (44.7 vs. 47.2%; P = 0.87), oxygen saturation less than 80% (15.8 vs. 25.0%; P = 0.22), or decrease in oxygen saturation greater than 3% (53.9 vs. 55.6%; P = 0.87). Duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of stay, and in-hospital mortality were similar between study groups.ConclusionsApneic oxygenation does not seem to increase lowest arterial oxygen saturation during endotracheal intubation of critically ill patients compared with usual care. These findings do not support routine use of apneic oxygenation during endotracheal intubation of critically ill adults. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02051816).
| S-EPMC4803060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endotracheal intubation success rates in the prehospital setting are variable. Our objective was to describe the challenges encountered and corrective actions taken during the process of endotracheal intubation by paramedics.Analysis of prehospital airway management using a prospective registry that was linked to an emergency medical services administrative database.Emergency medical services system serving King County, Washington, 2006-2011. Paramedics in this system have the capability to administer neuromuscular blocking agents to facilitate intubation (i.e., rapid sequence intubation).A total of 7,523 patients more than 12 years old in whom paramedics attempted prehospital endotracheal intubation.None.An intubation attempt was defined as the introduction of the laryngoscope into the patient's mouth, and the attempt concluded when the laryngoscope was removed from the mouth. Endotracheal intubation was successful on the first attempt in 77% and ultimately successful in 99% of patients (7,433 of 7,523). Paramedics used a rapid sequence intubation strategy on 54% of first attempts. Among the subset with a failed first attempt (n = 1,715), bodily fluids obstructing the laryngeal view (50%), obesity (28%), patient positioning (17%), and facial or spinal trauma (6%) were identified as challenges to intubation. A variety of adjustments were made to achieve intubation success, including upper airway suctioning (used in 43% of attempts resulting in success), patient repositioning (38%), rescue bougie use (19%), operator change (16%), and rescue rapid sequence intubation (6%). Surgical cricothyrotomy (0.4%, n = 27) and bag-valve-mask ventilation (0.8%, n = 60) were rarely performed by paramedics as final rescue airway strategies.Airway management in the prehospital setting has substantial challenges. Success can require a collection of adjustments that involve equipment, personnel, and medication often in a simultaneous fashion.
| S-EPMC4902016 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7211574 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7832753 | biostudies-literature