Randomized controlled trial assessing intubation time with and without an aerosol biocontainment device

Author:

Kohanski Michael A.1ORCID,Ungerer Heather1,Xu Katherine1,Douglas Jennifer E.1,Carey Ryan M.1,Rassekh Christopher H.1,Chao Tiffany N.1,Weinstein Mitchell L.2,Atkins Joshua H.2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Rhinology

2. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA

Abstract

Introduction: The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic renewed interest in infectious aerosols and methods to reduce risk of airborne respiratory pathogen transmission. This has led to the development of novel aerosol protective devices for which clinical and aerosol protective features have not been fully characterized. The relative efficacy of these devices for use during airway procedures has not been assessed in randomized controlled trials. Materials and Methods: We recruited anesthesiology attendings, residents, and certified registered nurse anesthetists to perform intubations with an aerosol biocontainment device (ABCD). Thirty-seven patients undergoing procedures requiring intubation in the operating room were recruited and randomized (2:1) to intubation with (25) or without (12) the ABCD. Primary endpoints were time to secure the airway and adverse events. Secondary endpoints were a number of intubation attempts, access to the patient and airway equipment through the device ports, user assessment of ABCD function and technical burden, and patient experience in the ABCD. Results: Intubation time with the ABCD (46 s) was not significantly different compared to intubation without the ABCD (37 s; P=0.06). There were 3 adverse events with the ABCD (1 claustrophobia, 2 unanticipated difficult airways) that required device removal for intubation. In general, patients tolerated the device well and ABCD users felt the device functioned as intended but increased the technical burden associated with intubation. Discussion: It is feasible to use an aerosol protective device for intubation. The introduction of novel devices into high acuity airway procedures should be approached with caution and should account for the risk mitigation gained from the device balanced against the increased procedural complexity and potential safety risks associated with restricted access to the airway.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Complementary and alternative medicine,Pharmaceutical Science

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3