• search hit 15 of 33
Back to Result List

Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research

Please always quote using this URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-320747
  • Background Airway management is crucial and, probably, even the most important key competence in anaesthesiology, which directly influences patient safety and outcome. However, high-quality research is rarely published and studies usually have different primary or secondary endpoints which impedes clear unbiased comparisons between studies. The aim of the present study was to gather and analyse primary and secondary endpoints in video laryngoscopy studies being published over the last ten years and to create a core set of uniform orBackground Airway management is crucial and, probably, even the most important key competence in anaesthesiology, which directly influences patient safety and outcome. However, high-quality research is rarely published and studies usually have different primary or secondary endpoints which impedes clear unbiased comparisons between studies. The aim of the present study was to gather and analyse primary and secondary endpoints in video laryngoscopy studies being published over the last ten years and to create a core set of uniform or homogeneous outcomes (COS). Methods Retrospective analysis. Data were identified by using MEDLINE® database and the terms “video laryngoscopy” and “video laryngoscope” limited to the years 2007 to 2017. A total of 3351 studies were identified by the applied search strategy in PubMed. Papers were screened by two anaesthesiologists independently to identify study endpoints. The DELPHI method was used for consensus finding. Results In the 372 studies analysed and included, 49 different outcome categories/columns were reported. The items “time to intubation” (65.86%), “laryngeal view grade” (44.89%), “successful intubation rate” (36.56%), “number of intubation attempts” (23.39%), “complications” (21.24%), and “successful first-pass intubation rate” (19.09%) were reported most frequently. A total of 19 specific parameters is recommended. Conclusions In recent video laryngoscopy studies, many different and inhomogeneous parameters were used as outcome descriptors/endpoints. Based on these findings, we recommend that 19 specific parameters (e.g., “time to intubation” (inserting the laryngoscope to first ventilation), “laryngeal view grade” (C&L and POGO), “successful intubation rate”, etc.) should be used in coming research to facilitate future comparisons of video laryngoscopy studies.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author: Jochen Hinkelbein, Ivan Iovino, Edoardo De Robertis, Peter Kranke
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-320747
Document Type:Journal article
Faculties:Medizinische Fakultät / Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie (ab 2004)
Language:English
Parent Title (English):BMC Anesthesiology
Year of Completion:2019
Volume:19
Article Number:47
Source:BMC Anesthesiology (2019) 19:47. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0716-8
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0716-8
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Tag:airway management; primary endpoint; primary outcome; video laryngoscopy
Release Date:2024/03/05
Licence (German):License LogoCC BY: Creative-Commons-Lizenz: Namensnennung 4.0 International