Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of tracheal intubation by the Macintosh laryngoscope and Pentax-AWS (Airway Scope) during chest compression: a manikin study

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Journal of Anesthesia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To compare tracheal intubation with the Pentax Airway Scope (AWS) and the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL) during chest compression, 25 anesthesiologists (including 12 specialists having >5 years of experience and 13 trainees having <2 years of experience) performed tracheal intubation using either the McL or the AWS, with or without chest compression, on a manikin. Using the McL, both specialists and trainees took a significantly longer time (P < 0.01) to secure the airway with chest compression (17.3 ± 3.7 and 22.5 ± 8.0, respectively) and than without chest compression (11.3 ± 2.9 and 13.9 ± 4.4 s, respectively). No significant difference was observed in time needed to secure the airway using the AWS with or without chest compression in both groups. From the standpoint of experience, time to complete intubation for specialists using the McL during chest compression was significantly shorter than that for trainees. In contrast, the difference in time to complete intubation with the AWS during chest compression was not significantly different between the two groups. Based on these results, we conclude that the use of the AWS may reduce the time needed to secure the airway during chest compression.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

References

  1. Hazinski MF, Nadkarni VM, Hickey RW, O’Connor R, Becker LB, Zaritsky A. Major changes in the 2005 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC: reaching the tipping point for change. Circulation. 2005;112:206–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gatward JJ, Thomas MJ, Nolan JP, Cook TM. Effect of chest compressions on the time taken to insert airway devices in a manikin. Br J Anaesth. 2008;100:351–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Katz SH, Falk JL. Misplaced endotracheal tubes by paramedics in an urban emergency medical services system. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;37:32–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jones JH, Murphy MP, Dickson RL, Somerville GG, Brizendine EJ. Emergency physician-verified out-of-hospital intubation: miss rates by paramedics. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:707–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Koyama J, Aoyama T, Kusano Y, Seguchi T, Kawagishi K, Iwashita T, et al. Description and first clinical application of Airway Scope for tracheal intubation. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2006;18:247–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Asai T, Liu EH, Matsumoto S, Hirabayashi Y, Seo N, Suzuki A, et al. Use of the Pentax-AWS in 293 patients with difficult airways. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:898–904.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hirabayashi Y, Seo N. Airway Scope: early clinical experience in 405 patients. J Anesth. 2008;22:81–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hirabayashi Y. Airway Scope versus Macintosh laryngoscope: a manikin study. Emerg Med J. 2007;24:357–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Suzuki A, Toyama Y, Katsumi N, Kunisawa T, Sasaki R, Hirota K, et al. The Pentax-AWS® rigid indirect video laryngoscope: clinical assessment of performance in 320 cases. Anaesthesia. 2008;63:641–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Komatsu R, Kamata K, Hamada K, Sessler DI, Ozaki M. Airway scope and Stylet scope for tracheal intubation in a simulated difficult airway. Anesth Analg. 2009;108:273–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Asai T, Enomoto Y, Okuda Y. Airway Scope for difficult intubation. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:199.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hirabayashi Y, Seo N. Tracheal intubation by non-anesthesia residents using the Pentax-AWS airway scope and Macintosh laryngoscope. J Clin Anesth. 2009;21:268–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hirabayashi Y. Ease of use of the Airway Scope vs the Bullard laryngoscope: a manikin study. Can J Anaesth. 2007;54:397–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, Hyogo College of Medicine, Mukogawa-cho 1-1, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, 663-8501, Japan

    Nobuyasu Komasawa, Ryusuke Ueki, Hajime Nomura & Motoi Itani

  2. Department of Surgical Center, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Japan

    Yoshiroh Kaminoh

Authors
  1. Nobuyasu Komasawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ryusuke Ueki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hajime Nomura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Motoi Itani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yoshiroh Kaminoh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nobuyasu Komasawa.

About this article

Cite this article

Komasawa, N., Ueki, R., Nomura, H. et al. Comparison of tracheal intubation by the Macintosh laryngoscope and Pentax-AWS (Airway Scope) during chest compression: a manikin study. J Anesth 24, 306–308 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-010-0874-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-010-0874-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation