Impact of VieScope® on first-attempt success during simulated COVID-19 patients intubation: A randomized cross-over simulation trial

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The purpose of our study was to determine the efficacy of intubation with VieScope® and Macintosh laryngoscope in different scenarios of simulated COVID-19 patients by paramedics wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol generating procedures (AGPs). METHODS: Study was designed as a prospective, observational, randomized, crossover simulation trial. 37 paramedics took part in the study. They performed endotracheal intubation (ETI) of a person suspected of COVID-19. Intubation was performed using VieScope® and Macintosh laryngoscopes in two research scenarios: Scenario A - normal airway and Scenario B - difficult airway. Both the order of participants and the methods of intubation were random. RESULTS: In Scenario A, time to intubation using VieScope® and Macintosh laryngoscope amounted to 35.3 (IQR; 32–40) seconds and 35.8 (IQR: 30–40)s, respectively. Nearly all participants performed ETI successfully both with VieScope® and Macintosh laryngoscope (100% vs. 94.6%). In scenario B, intubation with the VieScope®, compared to the Macintosh laryngoscope, was associated with a shorter intubation time (p<0.001), a higher success rate of the first intubation attempt (p<0.001), a better visualization degree glottis (p=0.012) and ease of intubation (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that the use of a VieScope® compared to Macintosh laryngoscope in difficult airway intubation performed by paramedics wearing PPE-AGP is associated with shorter intubation times, greater intubation efficiency as well as better visualization of the glottis. Additional clinical trials are necessary to confirm the obtained results.

[1]  M. Punke,et al.  Elective Tracheal Intubation With the VieScope—A Prospective Randomized Non-inferiority Pilot Study (VieScOP-Trial) , 2022, Frontiers in Medicine.

[2]  M. Dąbrowski,et al.  Comparison of Vie Scope® and Macintosh laryngoscopes for intubation during resuscitation by paramedics wearing personal protective equipment , 2022, The American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

[3]  L. Konge,et al.  Direct vs. Video-Laryngoscopy for Intubation by Paramedics of Simulated COVID-19 Patients under Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Crossover Trial , 2021, Journal of clinical medicine.

[4]  W. Wetsch,et al.  Intubation using VieScope vs. Video laryngoscopy in full personal protective equipment – a randomized, controlled simulation trial , 2021, BMC Anesthesiology.

[5]  F. Longhini,et al.  Tracheal intubation while wearing personal protective equipment in simulation studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial-sequential analysis , 2021, Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (English Edition).

[6]  W. Wetsch,et al.  Comparison of the novel VieScope with conventional and video laryngoscope in a difficult airway scenario – a randomized, controlled simulation trial , 2021, BMC Emergency Medicine.

[7]  R. Sinert,et al.  The Impact of Personal Protection Equipment on Intubation Times , 2021, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.

[8]  C. Yuksen,et al.  Direct Versus Video Laryngoscopy in Emergency Intubation: A Randomized Control Trial Study , 2021, Bulletin of emergency and trauma.

[9]  T. Vymazal,et al.  Optical Devices in Tracheal Intubation—State of the Art in 2020 , 2021, Diagnostics.

[10]  W. Wieczorek,et al.  Mechanical chest compression devices as an option for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19 pandemic , 2021, Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal.

[11]  K. Ruetzler,et al.  Airtraq® versus Macintosh laryngoscope for airway management during general anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials , 2021, Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal.

[12]  K. Gourgoulianis,et al.  Video Laryngoscopy Improves Intubation Times With Level C Personal Protective Equipment in Novice Physicians: A Randomized Cross-Over Manikin Study. , 2021, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[13]  L. Szarpak,et al.  The impact of COVID-19 on airway management in prehospital resuscitation , 2020, Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal.

[14]  A. Çağlar,et al.  Impact of personal protective equipment on prehospital endotracheal intubation performance in simulated manikin , 2020, Australasian Emergency Care.

[15]  K. Khunti,et al.  Classification of aerosol-generating procedures: a rapid systematic review , 2020, BMJ open respiratory research.

[16]  M. Jaguszewski,et al.  Comparison of different chest compression positions for use while wearing CBRN-PPE: a randomized crossover simulation trial , 2020 .

[17]  M. Antonelli,et al.  Respiratory physiology of COVID-19-induced respiratory failure compared to ARDS of other etiologies , 2020, Critical Care.

[18]  J. Bennetts,et al.  COVID‐19 safety: aerosol‐generating procedures and cardiothoracic surgery and anaesthesia — Australian and New Zealand consensus statement , 2020, The Medical journal of Australia.

[19]  K. Woolley,et al.  Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Guidelines, adaptations and lessons during the COVID-19 pandemic , 2020, Ethics, Medicine and Public Health.

[20]  Jingping Wang,et al.  Strategy of using personal protective equipment during aerosol generating medical procedures with COVID-19 , 2020, Journal of Clinical Anesthesia.

[21]  M. Dąbrowski,et al.  Video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation of adult patients with suspected/ confirmed COVID-19. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials , 2020 .

[22]  M. Jaguszewski,et al.  Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when wearing personal protective equipment: A randomized multicenter crossover simulation trial. , 2020, Cardiology journal.

[23]  M. Jaguszewski,et al.  Which intravascular access should we use in patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19? , 2020, Resuscitation.

[24]  M. Jaguszewski,et al.  COVID-19 challenge for modern medicine. , 2020, Cardiology journal.

[25]  M. Jaguszewski,et al.  Cloth masks versus medical masks for COVID-19 protection. , 2020, Cardiology journal.

[26]  R. Goldman,et al.  Multiple intubation attempts in the emergency department and in-hospital mortality: A retrospective observational study. , 2020, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[27]  K. Ruetzler,et al.  Efficacy of double-lumen intubation performed by paramedics on patients with lung damage. Experimental, pilot simulation trial , 2020 .

[28]  J. Smereka,et al.  COVID 19 a challenge for emergency medicine and every health care professional , 2020, The American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

[29]  Dexing Liu,et al.  Intubation of non-difficult airways using video laryngoscope versus direct laryngoscope: a randomized, parallel-group study , 2019, BMC Anesthesiology.

[30]  T M Cook,et al.  Guidelines for the management of tracheal intubation in critically ill adults. , 2017, British journal of anaesthesia.

[31]  K. Sporer,et al.  Direct Versus Video Laryngoscopy for Prehospital Intubation: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis , 2017, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[32]  Logan D. Glosser Assessment of endotracheal tube intubation. Review of existing scales , 2017 .

[33]  R. Sierżantowicz,et al.  Comparison of direct and optical laryngoscopy during simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation. , 2017, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[34]  M. Frass,et al.  A comparison of a traditional endotracheal tube versus ETView SL in endotracheal intubation during different emergency conditions , 2016, Medicine.

[35]  A. Rodríguez-Núñez,et al.  A comparison of the McGrath-MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes for child tracheal intubation during resuscitation by paramedics. A randomized, crossover, manikin study. , 2016, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[36]  Ł. Szarpak,et al.  Does the use of a chest compression system in children improve the effectiveness of chest compressions? A randomised crossover simulation pilot study. , 2016, Kardiologia polska.

[37]  Ł. Szarpak,et al.  Comparison of the VivaSight single lumen endotracheal tube and the Macintosh laryngoscope for emergency intubation by experienced paramedics in a standardized airway manikin with restricted access: a randomized, crossover trial. , 2016, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[38]  Ł. Szarpak,et al.  Simulated endotracheal intubation of a patient with cervical spine immobilization during resuscitation: a randomized comparison of the Pentax AWS, the Airtraq, and the McCoy Laryngoscopes. , 2015, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[39]  A. Brambrink,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness of the C-MAC Video Laryngoscope versus Direct Laryngoscopy in the Setting of the Predicted Difficult Airway , 2012, Anesthesiology.

[40]  A G Butchart,et al.  The learning curve for videolaryngoscopy , 2010, Anaesthesia.