Skip Navigation



International Journal for Quality in Health Care Advance Access published online on November 15, 2005
International Journal for Quality in Health Care, doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzi091
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
18/1/17    most recent
mzi091v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Anderson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Kinsella, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Anderson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Kinsella, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care; all rights reserved
Accepted October 13, 2005

Article

The use of an anaesthetic simulator to assess single-use laryngoscopy equipment

Keith Anderson 1 *, Swapna Gambhir 1, Ronnie Glavin 2, and John Kinsella 1

1 University Department of Anaesthesia, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK
2 Scottish Clinical Simulation Centre, Stirling Royal Infirmary, Livilands Gate, Stirling, UK

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Keith Anderson, E-mail: keithanderson{at}doctors.net.uk


  Abstract

Objective. To compare the view at simulated direct laryngoscopy obtained with a standard laryngoscope, with and without a disposable cover and a disposable laryngoscope blade.

Design. Randomized non-blinded comparison.

Setting. The high-fidelity human patient simulator at the Scottish Clinical Simulation Centre.

Participants. Thirty-two anaesthetists with between 11 months and 25 years of experience.

Interventions. A randomized comparison of ease of laryngoscopy with each laryngoscope option for simulated easy and difficult laryngoscopy.

Main outcome measures. The best grade achievable at laryngoscopy (Cormack and Lehane grade) for each laryngoscope, for both easy and difficult laryngoscopy.

Results. For the easy setting, 34% (P = 0.001) of anaesthetists graded laryngoscopy more difficult with the covered laryngoscope, and 22% (P = 0.008) with the disposable laryngoscope considered laryngoscopy more difficult than with the standard laryngoscope. For the difficult simulator setting, 69% (P < 0.001) found laryngoscopy more difficult with the covered laryngoscope and 69% (P < 0.001) with the disposable laryngoscope, when compared with the standard laryngoscope. There was no difference between the laryngoscopy grades for the covered and disposable laryngoscope for either easy (P = 0.21) or difficult (P = 0.87) simulation.

Conclusions. Single-use equipment, as presently recommended for tonsillectomy surgery by the UK Department of Health, makes laryngoscopy more difficult for anaesthetists.

Keywords: Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease, laryngoscope, laryngoscopy, patient simulation.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Int J Qual Health CareHome page
T. Perneger
Ten reasons to conduct a randomized study in quality improvement
Int. J. Qual. Health Care, December 1, 2006; 18(6): 395 - 396.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.