Pediatric anesthesia & critical care
Emergency front‐of‐neck access in infants: A pragmatic crossover randomized control trial comparing two approaches on a simulated rabbit model
Primary resultResult — go to the resultDifference in median duration 11 s 95% CI −4.9 to 29Authors' conclusion
The scalpel-bougie tracheotomy was slightly faster than the rapid-sequence tracheotomy and favored by participants, with fewer tracheal injuries.
Study context
- Population
- Pediatric anesthesiologists and intensivists performing infant front-of-neck access on rabbit cadaversphysicians, crossover
- Participants
- 30 participants
- Comparison
- Rapid-sequence tracheotomy vs Scalpel-bougie tracheotomy
- Primary endpoint
- Duration until successful tracheal tube placement (equivalence margin ∆ = ±10 s)
Methodological detailscrossover, pragmatic, equivalence, simulation (rabbit cadaver model), Each technique practiced four times before a final measured tracheotomy, May–September 2022
- Crossover
- Pragmatic
- Equivalence
- Simulation (rabbit cadaver model)
- Each technique practiced four times before a final measured tracheotomy, May–September 2022
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Difference in median duration
11 s
95% CI −4.9 to 29
P = 0.07
By group
Secondary outcomes
Overall success rate
- Overall success rate
- 93.3% (95% CI: 83.8%-98.2%)
Participant preference
- Scalpel-bougie tracheotomy preferred among participants
Safety
- Significantly fewer damaged tracheal rings with scalpel-bougie tracheotomy
Original publication
Emergency front‐of‐neck access in infants: A pragmatic crossover randomized control trial comparing two approaches on a simulated rabbit model. Paediatr Anaesth. Published 10 November 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →