Comparison of first‐pass intubation success rates between two different videolaryngoscopes in an Australian prehospital and retrieval medicine service

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of the GlideScope Go videolaryngoscope (VL) in tracheal intubation in an Australian physician‐staffed critical care prehospital and retrieval medicine service.MethodsOur service has used VLs for several years, including the McGrath Mac, and from February 2019 the GlideScope Go. Clinicians may alternatively use direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh laryngoscope. We conducted a non‐inferiority trial comparing first‐pass intubation success using the GlideScope Go VL with that using the McGrath Mac VL. We collected data on video intubation of all adult patients between February 2017 and December 2019, by our service. Comparison was also made with patients intubated using direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh direct laryngoscope.ResultsOne hundred and seventy‐two patients were intubated with the aid of a VL. First‐pass success rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 0.98 (0.92–0.99) and 0.92 (0.84–0.96), respectively, for the GlideScope Go and McGrath Mac, giving a difference (95% CI) in first‐pass success rates of 0.06 (−0.01 to 0.13). First‐pass success rate for the Macintosh laryngoscope was 0.88 (0.84–0.91).ConclusionsWe demonstrated that first‐pass success rates with the GlideScope Go are at least as good as our service had achieved with both the McGrath Mac and with direct laryngoscopy.