King Video Laryngoscope Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Prehospital Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

King Video Laryngoscope Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Prehospital Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The goal of this study is to compare the first pass success rate of intubation between video assisted intubation and traditional direct visualization intubation in the field by Emergency Medical Service (EMS) professionals

We will equip several local advanced life support ambulances with a low cost video laryngoscope for a total of 12 months. We will outfit ½ of the ambulance crews with the King Video Laryngoscope (KVL) for 6 months while the other ½ of the ambulances will use traditional direct laryngoscopy (DL). After 6 months, the groups will switch devices. We will randomly assign those ambulances that first use the KVL. After one year (12 months) we will compare the outcomes between the two methods including first pass intubation success, total success rate for intubation, and complications (need for surgical airway, rescue device, need to revert from KVL to DL, etc.). Please see the attached protocol page for additional details.

Inclusion Criteria:

• all patients >= age 18 year of age undergoing ETI in the prehospital setting

Exclusion Criteria:

• age < 18 years of age