Gutenberg Open Science: Bonfils intubation fibrescope : use in simulation-based intubation training for medical students in comparison to MacIntosh laryngoscope

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-7379

Full metadata record

DC Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Limbach, Tobias	-
dc.contributor.author	Ott, Thomas	-
dc.contributor.author	Griesinger, Jan	-
dc.contributor.author	Jahn-Eimermacher, Antje	-
dc.contributor.author	Piepho, Tim	-
dc.date.accessioned	2022-07-12T09:05:32Z	-
dc.date.available	2022-07-12T09:05:32Z	-
dc.date.issued	2016
dc.identifier.uri	https://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/7393	-
dc.description.abstract	BACKGROUND: A variety of instruments are used to perform airway management by tracheal intubation. In this study, we compared the MacIntosh balde (MB) laryngoscope with the Bonfils intubation fibrescope as intubation techniques. The aim of this study was to identify the technique (MB or Bonfils) that would allow students in their last year of medical school to perform tracheal intubation faster and with a higher success probability. Data were collected from 150 participants using an airway simulator [‘Laerdal Airway Management Trainer’ (Laerdal Medical AS, Stavanger, Norway)]. The participants were randomly assigned to a sequence of techniques to use. Four consecutive intubation ‘trials’ were performed with each technique. These trials were evaluated for differences in the following categories: the ‘time to successful ventilation‘, ‘success probability’ within 90 s,’time to visualisation’ of the vocal cords (glottis), and ‘quality of visualisation’ according to the Cormack and Lehane score (C&L, grade 1–4). The primary endpoint was the ‘time to successful ventilation‘in the fourth and final trial. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the ‘time to successful ventilation’ between the two techniques in trial 4 (‘time to successful ventilation’: median: MB: 16 s, Bonfils: 14 s, p = 0.244). However, the ‘success probability’ within 90 s was higher when using a Macintosh blade than when using a Bonfils (95 vs. 87 %). The glottis could be better visualised when using a Bonfils (C&L score of 1 (best view): MB: 41 %, Bonfils: 93 %), but visualisation was achieved more rapidly when using a Macintosh blade (median: ‘time to visualisation’: MB: 6 s, Bonfils: 8 s, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The time to ventilation using the MacIntosh blade and Bonfils mainly did to differ, however success probabilities and time to visualisation primary favoured the MacIntosh blade as intubation technique, although the Bonfils seem to have a steeper learning curve. The Bonfils is still a promising intubation technique and might be easier to learn as the MB, at least in a manikin.	en_GB
dc.description.sponsorship	DFG, Open Access-Publizieren Universität Mainz / Universitätsmedizin	de
dc.language.iso	eng	de
dc.rights	CC BY	*
dc.rights.uri	https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/	*
dc.subject.ddc	610 Medizin	de_DE
dc.subject.ddc	610 Medical sciences	en_GB
dc.title	Bonfils intubation fibrescope : use in simulation-based intubation training for medical students in comparison to MacIntosh laryngoscope	en_GB
dc.type	Zeitschriftenaufsatz	de
dc.identifier.doi	http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-7379	-
jgu.type.dinitype	article	en_GB
jgu.type.version	Published version	de
jgu.type.resource	Text	de
jgu.organisation.department	FB 04 Medizin	de
jgu.organisation.number	2700	-
jgu.organisation.name	Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz	-
jgu.rights.accessrights	openAccess	-
jgu.journal.title	BMC Research Notes	de
jgu.journal.volume	9	de
jgu.pages.alternative	Art. 127	de
jgu.publisher.year	2016	-
jgu.publisher.name	BioMed Central	de
jgu.publisher.place	London	de
jgu.publisher.uri	http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-1937-2	de
jgu.publisher.issn	1756-0500	de
jgu.organisation.place	Mainz	-
jgu.subject.ddccode	610	de
opus.date.modified	2018-08-23T08:22:12Z
opus.subject.dfgcode	00-000
opus.organisation.string	FB 04: Medizin: Klinik für Anästhesiologie	de_DE
opus.identifier.opusid	56323
opus.institute.number	0418
opus.metadataonly	false
opus.type.contenttype	Keine	de_DE
opus.type.contenttype	None	en_EN
opus.affiliated	Ott, Thomas
jgu.publisher.doi	10.1186/s13104-016-1937-2	de
jgu.organisation.ror	https://ror.org/023b0x485
Appears in collections:	DFG-OA-Publizieren (2012 - 2017)

Files in This Item:

	File	Description	Size	Format
	bonfils_intubation_fibrescope-20220710234115746.pdf		1.13 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Show simple item record