Favour the best in case of emergency cricothyroidotomy-a randomized cross-over trial on manikin focused training and simulation of common devices.

Autor:	Didion N; Department of Anaesthesiology, Johannes-Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany., Pohlmann F; Department of Anaesthesiology, Johannes-Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany., Pirlich N; Department of Anaesthesiology, Johannes-Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany., Wittenmeier E; Department of Anaesthesiology, Johannes-Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany., Jänig C; Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Central hospital of the German armed forces, Koblenz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany., Wollschläger D; Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany., Griemert EV; Department of Anaesthesiology, Johannes-Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	PeerJ [PeerJ] 2024 Aug 23; Vol. 12, pp. e17788. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Aug 23 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI:	10.7717/peerj.17788
Abstrakt:	Background: Performing an emergency cricothyroidotomy (EC) is extremely challenging, the devices used should be easy to handle and the selected technique reliable. However, there is still an ongoing debate concerning the most superior technique. Methods: Three different techniques were compared using a standardized, simulated scenario regarding handling, performing, training and decision making: The scalpel-bougie technique (SBT), the surgical anatomical preparation technique (SAPT) and the Seldinger technique (ST). First, anaesthesia residents and trainees, paramedics and medical students (each group n = 50) performed a cricothyroidotomy randomly assigned with each of the three devices on a simulator manikin. The time needed for successful cricothyroidotomy was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included first-attempt success rate, number of attempts and user-satisfaction. The second part of the study investigated the impact of prior hands-on training on both material selection for EC and on time to decision-making in a simulated "cannot intubate cannot ventilate" situation. Results: The simulated scenario revealed that SBT and SAPT were significantly faster than percutaneous EC with ST ( p < 0.0001). Success rate was 100% for the first attempt with SBT and SAPT. Significant differences were found with regard to user-satisfaction between individual techniques ( p < 0.0001). In terms of user-friendliness, SBT was predominantly assessed as easy (87%). Prior training had a large impact regarding choice of devises ( p < 0.05), and time to decision making ( p = 0.05; 180 s vs . 233 s). Conclusion: This study supports the use of a surgical technique for EC and also a regular training to create familiarity with the materials and the process itself.The trial was registered before study start on 11.11.2018 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT: 2018-13819) with Nicole Didion as the principal investigator. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. (© 2024 Didion et al.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu