Comparison of Success Rates between Two Video Laryngoscope Systems Used in a Prehospital Clinical Trial

20130908-064719.jpg

ok first here is the article abstract Comparison
of Success Rates between Two Video Laryngoscope Systems Used in a
Prehospital Clinical Trial
Take home messages

  1. Both VL systems did no better than traditional DL when
    historical data reviewed in this prehospital system
  2. King Vision did worse than CMAC, mainly due to screen
    failures due to disconnections of handle from screen
  3. Supraglottic airway and BVM techniques were used to
    rescue both DL and VL failures so important to maintain
    comprehensive skills
1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s