Comparing McGRATH® MAC, C-MAC®, and Macintosh Laryngoscopes Operated by Medical Students: A Randomized, Crossover, Manikin Study. (15th September 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Shin, Myungju; Bai, Sun Joon; Lee, Ki-Young; Oh, Ein; Kim, Hyun Joo
• Other Names: Inaba Hideo Academic Editor.
• Is Part Of: BioMed research international. Volume 2016(2016)
• Publication Date: 2016-09-15
• Subjects: Medicine -- Periodicals; Biology -- Periodicals; Biotechnology -- Periodicals; Life sciences -- Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1155/2016/8943931
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2314-6133

Abstract

Abstract : We hypothesized that the McGRATH MAC would decrease the time of intubation compared to C-MAC for novices. Thirty-nine medical students who had used the Macintosh blade to intubate a manikin fewer than 3 times were recruited. The participants performed sequential intubations on the manikin in two simulated settings that included a normal airway and a difficult airway (tongue edema). The intubation time, success rate of intubation, Cormack-Lehane grade at laryngoscopy, and difficulty using the device were recorded. Each participant was asked to identify the device that was most useful. The intubation time decreased significantly and by a similar amount to the McGRATH MAC and C-MAC compared to the Macintosh blade (P < 0.001 and P = 0.017, resp.). In the difficult airway, the intubation times were similar among the three devices. The McGRATH MAC and C-MAC significantly increased the success rate of intubation, improved the Cormack-Lehane grade, and decreased the difficulty score compared to the Macintosh blade in both airway settings. The majority of participants selected the McGRATH MAC as the most useful device. The McGRATH MAC and C-MAC may offer similar benefits for intubation compared to the Macintosh blade in normal and difficult airway situations.