J Korean Soc Emerg Med.  2021 Aug;32(4):362-370.

Effect of the use of a video laryngoscope and bougie on the performance of endotracheal intubation on the ground by novice prehospital caregivers: a randomized simulation study

• Song HW
• Kang GH
• Jang YS
• Kim W
• Choi HY
• Kim JG
• Lee Y
• Kim TY
• Bang SH

Abstract

Objective
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a bougie and glidescope video laryngoscope (GVL) for ground intubation by novice prehospital caregivers. We hypothesized that the intubation outcome using a bougie or GVL was superior to that using the Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL) with a stylet (MCLS) in ground intubation.
Methods
A randomized crossover manikin study was conducted. Studied groups were categorized into 4 according to the intubation devices used; MCLS, Macintosh laryngoscope with bougie (MCLB), glidescope video laryngoscope with a stylet (GVLS), and glidescope video laryngoscope with bougie (GVLB). The primary outcome was the total endotracheal intubation time and the secondary outcome was the success rate for endotracheal intubation.
Results
The use of a bougie did not cause a significant difference in the intubation time (MCLS vs. MCLB, P=0.213; GVLS vs. GVLB, P=0.633) and the success rate of endotracheal intubation (MCLS vs. MCLB, P>0.990; GVLS vs. GVLB, P=0.077) was compared with the use of a stylet in MCL and GVL. The use of GVL showed a longer endotracheal intubation time compared with MCLS (MCLS vs. GVLS, P<0.001; MCLS vs. GVLB, P<0.001). GVLB showed a decreased success rate of endotracheal intubation compared with the use of MCL (MCLS vs. GVLB, P=0.004; MCLB vs. GVLB, P<0.001).
Conclusion
The use of the GVL and a bougie could not affect the performance of endotracheal intubation on the ground. The use of MCL and a stylet for ground intubation could increase the intubation success rate and shorten intubation time compared with the use of a bougie or the use of GVL.

Keyword

Intubation; Airway management; Simulation training