A comparison of the McGrath videolaryngoscope with direct laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation in the operating theatre: a multicentre randomised controlled trial
Primary result · First-pass tracheal intubation successResult — go to the resultOR for first-pass success 1.31 95% CI 1.23–1.39Authors' conclusion
These findings suggest that the McGrath videolaryngoscope is superior to a conventional direct laryngoscope for rapid sequence intubation in the operating theatre.
Study context
- Population
- Adults requiring tracheal intubation (RSI) for elective, urgent or emergency surgery in the operating theatre
- Participants
- 1,000 adults
- Comparison
- McGrath MAC videolaryngoscope vs direct laryngoscopy for RSI
- McGrathn = 500
- Direct laryngoscopyn = 500reference
- Primary endpoint
- First-pass tracheal intubation success
Methodological detailsmulticentre
- Multicentre
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
OR for first-pass success
1.31
95% CI 1.23–1.39
P < 0.001
Events by treatment group
McGrath vs Direct laryngoscopy
OR for first-pass success 1.31 (95% CI 1.23–1.39); P < 0.001
Further findings
Cormack and Lehane grade ≥ 3 view
P < 0.001
First-pass success by operator grade (subgroup)
- Advantage observed in both trainees and consultants
Safety
Adverse events
P < 0.001
Original publication
A comparison of the McGrath videolaryngoscope with direct laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation in the operating theatre: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Anaesthesia. Published 12 February 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →