Comparing the Ease of Endotracheal Intubation with and without an Intubation Box in COVID-19 Patients

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

Karami Nazli; Mahoori Alireza; Karami Tohid; Shakeri Alireza; Abtahi Dariush

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: ARCHIVES OF ANESTHESIOLOGY AND CRITICAL CARE Year:2024 | Volume:10 | Issue:3 Page(s): 216-220

Download Full-Text

View:

Download:

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

Comparing the Ease of Endotracheal Intubation with and without an Intubation Box in COVID-19 Patients

Author(s)

Keywords

Anesthesiologists

COVID-19

Endotracheal intubation

Health personnel

Personal protective equipment

Respiratory aerosols and droplets

Abstract

Background: Endotracheal intubation is a potentially high-risk aerosol-generating procedure. So, an intubation box (I-Box) is designed for personal protection during intubation. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of endotracheal intubation with and without an I-box in COVID-19 patients.
Methods: In this study, 60 COVID-19 patients (30 patients in each group) with and without I-box groups were included. outcomes of intubation including duration of intubation, first-pass success intubation, suitable visibility of airways, restriction of movement in the neck, the need to surface maneuvering of the airway, and the number of attempts for successful intubation were compared between the two groups.
Results: The time of intubation was significantly longer in the I-box group (15.27±2.6 seconds) than without the I-box group (8.37±1.3 seconds) (p<0.001). All patients (100%) were intubated in the first attempt in the without I-box group while the rate of first-pass success intubation was 50% in the I-box group (p <0.001). The visibility of the airway was significantly better in the without I-box group than the I-box group (without I-box: 23 patients (76.7%), I-box: 15 patients (50%), p= 0.032). The frequency of need to optimizing maneuver of the airway was in without and with I-box was 23.3% and 50% respectively (p=0.032).
Conclusion: However, the I-box as a physical barrier can protect healthcare workers but its use increased the time to intubation and the number of attempts for successful intubation and reduced the rate of first-pass success intubation and visibility.

Multimedia

No record.

Cites

No record.

References

Cite

Related Journal Papers

No record.

Related Seminar Papers

No record.

Related Plans

No record.