Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Albany Medical College | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose in this study is to determine whether there is a difference in the incidence of postoperative sore throat when using the GlideScopeâ„¢ versus a traditional intubation blade involving patients that are not anticipated to have a difficult airway.
The goal of this study is to determine whether the use of the GlideScopeâ„¢ video laryngoscope during intubation leads to a greater or lesser incidence of sore throat when compared to traditional laryngoscope blades used for intubation, such as the Macintosh or Miller blade. During postoperative checks by a board certified anesthesiologist at the Albany Medical Center (AMC) Hospital, it was noticed that patients who reported sore throat often required intubation with the GlideScopeâ„¢. Standard of care at the AMC Hospital dictates that the Glidescope is used as a "rescue" device for failed direct laryngoscopy on a difficult airway; if traditional direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh or Miller blade cannot provide adequate laryngeal views, progression to a different airway device such as the Glidescope or fiberoptic scope is indicated. The initial attempt with direct laryngoscopy on a difficult airway often requires utilization of McGill forceps, which increases the chance of upper airway injury prior to the rescue attempt with the GlideScope. Consequently, it is difficult to determine whether patients' reports of post-operative sore throat are caused by the irritation inflicted by the multiple laryngoscopic attempts required in patients where the Glidescope was needed as a rescue method, or whether it is due to the actual utilization of the Glidescope itself.
Previous studies have shown that the use of a GlideScopeâ„¢ decreases the likelihood of upper airway injury by decreasing the lower mean force applied during laryngoscopy when compared to a Macintosh laryngoscope; however, this study was done using manikins and it is not known whether this result can be translated to a patient oriented outcome. Another study compared the GlideScopeâ„¢ to direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation. Their results suggested that the incidence of postoperative moderate or severe sore throat was significantly reduced with use of the GlideScopeâ„¢ videolaryngoscope. However, other studies have shown increased incidence of postoperative sore throat with Glidescope usage when compared to other videolaryngoscopes and conventional Macintosh laryngoscope as a primary laryngoscopy method. In light of these studies, none have attempted a direct comparison of a Glidescope with conventional Macintosh/Miller laryngoscope blades with incidence of sore throat as a primary outcome of interest.
The purpose in this study is to determine whether there is a difference in the incidence of postoperative sore throat when using the GlideScopeâ„¢ versus a traditional intubation blade involving patients that are not anticipated to have a difficult airway. Exclusion of patients with difficult airways allows us to perform direct comparisons with the Glidescope and conventional direct laryngoscopy without compromising standard of care or increasing patient risk, which will be determined by the use of standard of care preoperative exams.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Macintosh/Miller Laryngoscope | Active Comparator | Macintosh or Miller laryngoscopy blade, preference left up to practitioner conducting intubation. These are the gold standards currently used in laryngoscopy. |
|
| Glidescope Laryngoscope | Active Comparator | Glidescope video-guided laryngoscopy blade |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Macintosh/Miller Laryngoscope | Device |
| ||
| Glidescope Laryngoscope |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Sore Throat | Based on subjective yes/no reply by patient | Within 24 hours post-operatively |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Dennis J Cirilla, DO | Department of Anesthesiology, Albany Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Albany Medical Center Hospital | Albany | New York | 12208 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15684262 | Background | Cooper RM, Pacey JA, Bishop MJ, McCluskey SA. Early clinical experience with a new videolaryngoscope (GlideScope) in 728 patients. Can J Anaesth. 2005 Feb;52(2):191-8. doi: 10.1007/BF03027728. | |
| 21150569 | Background | Aziz MF, Healy D, Kheterpal S, Fu RF, Dillman D, Brambrink AM. Routine clinical practice effectiveness of the Glidescope in difficult airway management: an analysis of 2,004 Glidescope intubations, complications, and failures from two institutions. Anesthesiology. 2011 Jan;114(1):34-41. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182023eb7. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010612 | Pharyngitis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D012141 | Respiratory Tract Infections |
| D007239 | Infections |
| D010608 | Pharyngeal Diseases |
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Device |
|
| 21965048 | Background | Carassiti M, Zanzonico R, Cecchini S, Silvestri S, Cataldo R, Agro FE. Force and pressure distribution using Macintosh and GlideScope laryngoscopes in normal and difficult airways: a manikin study. Br J Anaesth. 2012 Jan;108(1):146-51. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer304. Epub 2011 Sep 28. |
| 18635480 | Background | Jones PM, Armstrong KP, Armstrong PM, Cherry RA, Harle CC, Hoogstra J, Turkstra TP. A comparison of glidescope videolaryngoscopy to direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation. Anesth Analg. 2008 Jul;107(1):144-8. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e31816d15c9. |
| 20883502 | Background | Teoh WH, Saxena S, Shah MK, Sia AT. Comparison of three videolaryngoscopes: Pentax Airway Scope, C-MAC, Glidescope vs the Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia. 2010 Nov;65(11):1126-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06513.x. Epub 2010 Sep 30. |
| 12066737 | Background | Higgins PP, Chung F, Mezei G. Postoperative sore throat after ambulatory surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2002 Apr;88(4):582-4. doi: 10.1093/bja/88.4.582. |
| 2161310 | Background | Dupont WD, Plummer WD Jr. Power and sample size calculations. A review and computer program. Control Clin Trials. 1990 Apr;11(2):116-28. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(90)90005-m. |
| Background | Krasser K, Missaghi-Berlini S M, Moser A, Zadrobilek E. Evaluation of the standard adult GlideScope videolaryngoscope: orotracheal intubation performed by novice users after formal instruction. Internet Journal of Airway Management. Available from URL; http://www.ijam.at/volume03/clinicalinvestigation01/default.htm (accessed July 25, 2013). |
| 15892411 | Background | Biro P, Seifert B, Pasch T. Complaints of sore throat after tracheal intubation: a prospective evaluation. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2005 Apr;22(4):307-11. doi: 10.1017/s0265021505000529. |
| 20574234 | Background | Sharma D. Is GlideScope the best way to intubate? Anesthesiology. 2010 Jul;113(1):258-9; author reply 259. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181e0ef5c. No abstract available. |
| D012140 |
| Respiratory Tract Diseases |
| D010038 | Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases |