Comparison of Times for Two Easytube Placement Techniques
Open Access
- Author:
- Dekorte, David Paul
- Area of Honors:
- Science
- Degree:
- Bachelor of Science
- Document Type:
- Thesis
- Thesis Supervisors:
- Katherine H Baker, Thesis Supervisor
Thomas Eberlein, Thesis Honors Advisor - Keywords:
- anesthesiology
airway
supraglottic airway device
EasyTube - Abstract:
- Airway management is vital to anesthetic management. Multiple devices exist to facilitate airway management, including endotracheal tubes, masks and supraglottic airway devices. Supraglottic airway devices, including EasyTube, Combitube, and laryngeal mask airways, are becoming increasingly utilized. However, in hospitals, only laryngeal mask airways are commonly used. However, supraglottic devices are being increasingly recommended for difficult airways. A “difficult airway” indicates severe difficulty of either ventilation or oxygenation of patients through traditional methods (endotracheal tube or mask ventilation), and present a unique opportunity for new airway management devices. Novel placement techniques of supraglottic devices may improve difficult airway management. In this study, skilled providers from the Penn State Hershey Anesthesiology Department placed the EasyTube device with two techniques: the manufacturer-recommended blind technique, and a novel laryngoscopic technique. The goal was to determine if a significant difference existed in placement times. Using a simulation mannequin, each technique was performed twice after an explanation and short practice session. All study participants were uncompensated volunteers who gave verbal consent after the research explanation. Each was randomly assigned the first placement method, and followed with the second method. 32 volunteers participated in the study. The participants’ level of training and previous experience were compared with their results and familiarity with the device. The hypothesis was that placement times between the two techniques would differ by no more than ten seconds with a standard deviation of ten seconds. The results were analyzed using appropriate statistical methodology. The conclusion is that no statistically significant difference exists in placement times.