Evidence · Randomised trial
Comparison of Miller laryngoscope and UEScope videolaryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in four pediatric airway scenarios: a randomized, crossover simulation trial.
- Airway
- Cardiac arrest and resuscitation
- Difficult airway
- Education and simulation
- Intubation
- Medical
- Nursing
- Respiratory
This paper is from 2019, more than five years ago. Newer evidence may have been published since.
Summary
A randomised crossover manikin study in which 93 paramedics inexperienced in paediatric intubation and videolaryngoscopy compared the Miller direct laryngoscope with the UEScope videolaryngoscope across four simulated scenarios: normal and difficult airway, with and without uninterrupted chest compressions. Outcomes were overall and first-attempt success, intubation time and glottic view. The videolaryngoscope performed comparably in the normal airway without compressions and better in difficult airways and during ongoing compressions. Findings are simulation-based with prehospital novice operators, so extrapolation to PICU practice is limited but relevant to device choice and training.
Summary written for PICUlearn. Always read the original.
- Licence:
- Open (Creative Commons)
The full text of this openly licensed paper is available to PICUlearn members, and Peeky can answer questions from it.
Guidelines are shown for education. Follow your unit's own guidance and senior advice.