Comparing intubation distances between direct and video laryngoscopes using motion capture: a mannequin study

Area of Science:

• Anesthesiology
• Medical Devices
• Patient Safety

Background:

• Tracheal intubation poses aerosol exposure risks, especially during emergencies or with infectious diseases.
• Direct laryngoscopy may increase proximity to patient secretions.
• Videolaryngoscopes are proposed to mitigate this exposure risk.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the intubation distance achieved with videolaryngoscopes versus direct laryngoscopes.
• To evaluate the impact of different intubation scenarios (in-hospital vs. out-of-hospital) on this distance.

Main Methods:

• A crossover study design was employed using a mannequin for simulated tracheal intubations.
• Ten anesthesiologists participated, using a direct laryngoscope, McGrath MAC (McG), and Airway Scope (AWS) videolaryngoscopes.
• A motion capture system measured the shortest intubation distance in two simulated scenarios.

Main Results:

• Videolaryngoscopes (McG and AWS) provided significantly greater shortest intubation distances than direct laryngoscopes in both simulated scenarios.
• In-hospital: Direct laryngoscope (20.8 cm) vs. McG (44.2 cm) and AWS (42.9 cm).
• Out-of-hospital: Direct laryngoscope (18.8 cm) vs. McG (30.0 cm) and AWS (38.8 cm).

Conclusions:

• Videolaryngoscopes effectively extend the intubation distance compared to direct laryngoscopes.
• This increased distance may lower the risk of infection transmission from patient to intubator.
• The findings support videolaryngoscope use for enhanced provider safety during tracheal intubation.