Article Document Academic Article Information Content Entity Continuant Continuant Journal Article Entity Entity Generically Dependent Continuant 2025-06-24T01:51:27 RDF description of Evaluation of the Storz CMAC(R), Glidescope(R) GVL, AirTraq(R), King LTS-D, and direct laryngoscopy in a simulated difficult airway - http://repository.healthpartners.com/individual/document-rn18184 11412 31 10.1016/j.ajem.2012.10.001 public Randomized Controlled Trials American Journal of Emergency Medicine Evaluation of the Storz CMAC(R), Glidescope(R) GVL, AirTraq(R), King LTS-D, and direct laryngoscopy in a simulated difficult airway Emergency Medicine Intubation 2022-02-21T22:48:57.408-06:00 17404 <p>OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare first-attempt and overall success rates and success rates in relation to placement time among 5 different airway management devices: Storz CMAC, Glidescope GVL, AirTraq, King LTS-D, and direct laryngoscopy (DL). METHODS: Emergency medical technician basic (EMT-B), EMT-paramedics (EMT-P), and emergency medicine residents and staff physicians placed each of the 5 devices in a random order into an AirSim (TruCorp, Belfast, UK) part-task training manikin. The difficult airway scenario was created by fixing the manikin head to a stationary object and introducing simulated emesis into the hypopharynx. First-attempt and overall success and success in relation to placement time were compared. Provider feedback about device performance was also evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-four providers (16 EMT-basics, 54 EMT-paramedics, and 24 emergency department doctors of medicine) consented to participation. First-attempt and overall success rates for DL, King LTS-D, GVL, and CMAC were not statistically different. Compared with DL, the AirTraq was 96% less likely to be placed successfully (odds ratio, 0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.14). When time was factored into the model, the odds of successful placement of the King LTS-D were higher compared with DL (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.34-2.42) and lower for GVL (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.80) and AirTraq (HR, 0.228; 95% CI, 0.16-0.325). Providers ranked the CMAC first in terms of performance and preference for use in their practice setting. CONCLUSION: Overall success rates for DL, King-LTS-D, and both video laryngoscope systems were not different. When time was factored into the model, the King LTS-D was more likely to be placed successfully.<p> document-rn18184 Prospective Studies Attitude 3