Comparative Study of Prehospital Airway Devices Tested Using a Manikin Model: A Comparison of the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic (LMA Classict(TM)), Cobra Perilaryngeal Airway (Cobra PLA(TM)) and the King Laryngeal Tube (King LT(TM)).
- Author:
Yue Lah KIM
1
;
Hyoung Youn LEE
;
Gi Woon KIM
;
Heui Sug JO
;
Jin Hee JUNG
Author Information
1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Korea.
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Prehosp ital emergency care;
Emergency medical technicians;
Laryngeal masks
- MeSH:
Airway Management;
Benzeneacetamides;
Elapidae;
Electronic Mail;
Emergencies;
Emergency Medical Technicians;
Fires;
Health Personnel;
Humans;
Intubation, Intratracheal;
Laryngeal Masks;
Manikins;
Piperidones
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine
2010;21(6):776-782
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Prehospital airway management is crucial to emergency healthcare providers, especially for emergency medical technicians (EMTs). In spite of its clinical importance, adequate airway management cannot be guaranteed only with the use of endotracheal intubation. Many supraglottic airway devices have been introduced as substitutes for endotracheal intubation. We compared 3 such devices - LMA Classic(TM), Cobra PLA(TM) and King LT(TM) - using a manikin and recorded performance skill and preference. METHODS: Thirty EMTs participated in the airway management educational program and were enrolled in this study which was held in the Gyeong-Gi Fire Academy. We surveyed the participants general characteristics and experience by e-mail prior to this laboratory study of their skills. The airway management program consisted of a 10 minute lecture followed by 20 minutes of skill training. We observed the success rate, preference among the 3 devices, and the total procedure time of airway device insertion in different rooms. RESULTS: The LMA Classic(TM), Cobra PLA(TM) and King LT(TM) groups succeeded 90%, 76.7%, and 80%, respectively at the first trial. There was no statistically significant difference among the groups (p=0.372). To achieve adequate airway management, the groups spent 28.6+/-7.2, 24.7+/-4.9, and 26.9+/-7.0 seconds, respectively, again with no significant differences (p=0.108). A preference survey performed after the test showed the highest preference for King LT(TM), 57%. CONCLUSION: Three prehospital supraglottic airway devices showed no differences in success rate or procedure time. Despite this result, King LT(TM) was the most preferred.
