MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2412716717 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000001147

Early Endotracheal Tube Insertion with the GlideScope

2016· article· en· W2412716717 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy P. Turkstra, Fiorenzo Cusano, Jason A. Fridfinnson, Pravin Batohi, Maxim Rachinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlottisMedicineIntubationOrotracheal intubationSore throatAnesthesiaEndotracheal tubePharynxLaryngoscopyVideo laryngoscopeConfidence intervalTracheal intubationSurgeryAirwayLaryngoscopesLarynxInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The GlideScope videolaryngoscope is an intubating device routinely used by anesthesiologists for tracheal intubation. It is occasionally difficult to advance the endotracheal tube (ETT) into the trachea, despite a good view of the glottis. One technique that may be used when difficulty is encountered is to remove the GlideScope from the pharynx and introduce the ETT into the pharynx first, leaving it in place posteriorly while the GlideScope is inserted. Frequently, when the GlideScope is subsequently inserted, the ETT tip will then be in good view, resting near the glottis, and will easily advance into the trachea. In this randomized, single-blinded trial, we assessed whether orotracheal intubation with the GlideScope is faster and/or easier with the ETT-first technique as a primary technique in elective patients. METHODS: One hundred sixty patients with normal-appearing airways who required elective orotracheal intubation were allocated randomly to intubation with insertion of the ETT or GlideScope into the oropharynx first. The primary outcome was time to intubation. The secondary outcomes were subjective ease of intubation (100-mm visual analog scale, 0 = easy; 100 = difficult), number of attempts/failures, incidence of oropharyngeal bleeding, and postoperative sore throat and/or vocal changes. RESULTS: Baseline demographics were similar between the 2 groups. Mean time to intubation was 48.2 ± 17.1 seconds with the ETT-first technique and 51.5 ± 21.8 seconds with the GlideScope-first technique (P = 0.30). The mean difference was 3.3 seconds in favor of the ETT-first technique (95% confidence interval, -2.9 to 9.6). The median ease of intubation using the visual analog scale was 13.3 mm (interquartile range, 5.3 to 21) with the ETT-first technique and 13.5 mm (interquartile range, 5.6 to 29.5) with the GlideScope-first technique (P = 0.30). The difference between the medians was -2.0 mm in favor of the ETT-first group (95% confidence interval, -1.5 to 6.0). There was no difference between groups for number of intubation attempts, incidence of oropharyngeal bleeding, laryngoscopic grade, sore throat, or vocal changes. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of GlideScope laryngoscopy, no statistically significant difference was observed in the time to intubate or the subjective ease of intubation whether the ETT or GlideScope was inserted into the oropharynx first.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207