The Flex-it® Articulated Stylet Does Not Shorten Intubation Duration During Videolaryngoscopy Compared to the GlideRite® Rigid Stylet in Patients Wearing a Semi-rigid Cervical Collar: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Compared to the GlideRite® rigid stylet used with the GlideScope® and its hyperangulated blade, the Flex-it® stylet permits a dynamic orientation of the endotracheal tube toward the glottic aperture. Our study compared the GlideRite stylet and Flex-it stylet on GlideScope intubation durations in patients wearing a semi-rigid cervical collar, simulating conditions of cervical instability. Methods Our institutional research ethics board approved the study protocol (Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont IRB#14013) for this single-centre randomized controlled trial on 12/05/2014. Eighty patients between 18 and 70 years old were randomized into one of two interventions: intubation with GlideScope + GlideRite stylet (GlideRite) or intubation with GlideScope + Flex-it stylet (Flex-it). We used a hyperangulated blade, size 4. All included patients provided written consent, had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II, and did not exhibit any difficult intubation criteria or known cervical spine anomaly. Following induction of anesthesia, a Philadelphia® semi-rigid cervical collar was installed to simulate conditions associated with cervical instability. One of the three anesthesiologists participating in the study performed the intubation. The primary endpoint was intubation duration in seconds, from the beginning of the laryngoscopy until detection of expired CO2. Secondary outcomes were endotracheal tube handling duration in seconds, intubation failure, Intubation Difficulty Score, and ease of stylet removal. Variations in blood pressure, heart rate, O2 saturation during intubation, postoperative hoarseness, and sore throat intensity were also compared between the interventions. Results Intubation was longer when using Flex-it vs. GlideRite (sec, Median [quartiles]), 71 [50-84] vs. 48 [39-60], P = .006). Kaplan-Meier curves showed that at 1 min, 20% of Flex-it patients were intubated vs. only 20% of GlideRite patients. The endotracheal tube (ETT) handling duration (sec, Median [quartiles]) was longer with Flex-it than with GlideRite, with 48 [33-66] vs. 34 [25-39], P = .007. The percent of failures was significantly higher with Flex-it (13/38, 32.5%) compared to GlideRite (1/38, 2.5%), P< .001. The Intubation Difficulty Scale score was significantly higher for Flex-it, with median [quartiles] of 6[5-7], compared to 2[2-5] for GlideRite, P< .001. There were no blood stains on the ETT or desaturations in either intervention. Ease of stylet removal, hoarseness, sore throat, blood pressure and heart rate measurements, and O2 saturation after intubation were not different between the interventions. Conclusion Videolaryngoscopy intubation using the Flex-it stylet was slower, more difficult, and had more failures than the GlideRite stylet in patients with simulated cervical instability wearing a semi-rigid cervical collar.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".