Comparison of intubation performance by junior emergency department doctors using gum elastic bougie versus stylet reinforced endotracheal tube insertion techniques

Brazil, Victoria, Grobler, Catharina, Greenslade, Jaimi and Burke, John (2012) Comparison of intubation performance by junior emergency department doctors using gum elastic bougie versus stylet reinforced endotracheal tube insertion techniques. EMA - Emergency Medicine Australasia, 24 2: 194-200. doi:10.1111/j.1742-6723.2011.01506.x


Author Brazil, Victoria
Grobler, Catharina
Greenslade, Jaimi
Burke, John
Title Comparison of intubation performance by junior emergency department doctors using gum elastic bougie versus stylet reinforced endotracheal tube insertion techniques
Formatted title
Comparison of intubation performance by junior emergency department doctors using gum elastic bougie versus stylet reinforced endotracheal tube insertion techniques
Journal name EMA - Emergency Medicine Australasia   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1742-6731
1742-6723
Publication date 2012-04
Year available 2011
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2011.01506.x
Volume 24
Issue 2
Start page 194
End page 200
Total pages 7
Place of publication Richmond, VIC, Australia
Publisher Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Asia
Collection year 2012
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Objective:
Endotracheal intubation is a challenging procedure in emergency medicine. Junior doctors lack experience and confidence in this task. The use of a gum elastic bougie (GEB) to facilitate intubation may improve success rates, especially in difficult situations.

Methods:
Junior doctors working in the ED were studied. Endotracheal intubation was simulated using part-task trainers in "easy" positioning and "difficult" positioning modes. Intubation was attempted in both positions using either an endotracheal tube, with re-inforcing stylet (ETT-S), or insertion of a gum elastic bougie (GEB), with subsequent passage of the endotracheal tube over the bougie. Success rates and time to complete intubation were measured with GEB, and with ETT-S. Participants were asked to record the perceived ease of intubation.

Results:
One hundred and four intubations were performed by 26 study subjects. Overall, mean time to intubation with ETT-S technique was 16.14s (14.49-17.98 95% CI), and was faster than with GEB 24.18 (21.45-27.25 95% CI) in both airway difficulty grades (P < 0.01). The success rate for intubation using the GEB was 100%, compared with 92.9% with ETT-S. This difference was not statistically significant. Perceived ease of intubation was similar for GEB and ETT-S (VAS 6.808 vs 6.904).

Conclusion:
The use of a GEB marginally increases the time taken to perform endotracheal intubation. Success rates for junior doctors attempting endotracheal intubation were not significantly different between the two techniques. Success rates for novice practitioners using a GEB were high after even limited instruction and practice.
Keyword Gum elastic bougie
Intubation
Junior doctor
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ
Additional Notes Published online: 28 November 2011.

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Official 2012 Collection
School of Medicine Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 2 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 2 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Mon, 19 Dec 2011, 09:55:38 EST by Matthew Lamb on behalf of School of Medicine