McGrath MAC Versus Three-Dimensional Printed Video Laryngoscopes: A Randomized, Manikin-Simulated Noninferiority Controlled Study with Medical Students
Primary result · First-attempt intubation success, standard airway stationResult — go to the resultDifference 24.4% 95% CI 17.5%–31.3%Authors' conclusion
The 3DVL was inferior in achieving first-attempt intubation when compared with the STVL with a difference in success rate >7.5% margin in simulated scenarios with medical students.
Study context
- Population
- Medical students intubating Airway Management Trainer manikins (standard and difficult airway stations)5 medical schools
- Participants
- 209 students
- Comparison
- Low-cost 3D-printed video laryngoscope vs standard video laryngoscope
- Primary endpoint
- First-attempt intubation success rate (noninferiority margin 7.5%)
Methodological detailsnoninferiority, manikin-simulated, multicentre (5 medical schools)
- Noninferiority
- Manikin-simulated
- Multicentre (5 medical schools)
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
First-attempt intubation success, standard airway station
Difference
24.4%
95% CI 17.5%–31.3%
Events by treatment group
STVL vs 3DVL
difference 24.4% (95% CI 17.5%–31.3%)
Non-inferiority margin 7.5 as printed, not drawn
Further findings
First-attempt intubation success, difficult airway station
- Success rates with the 2 VLs did not differ
Original publication
McGrath MAC Versus Three-Dimensional Printed Video Laryngoscopes: A Randomized, Manikin-Simulated Noninferiority Controlled Study with Medical Students. Anesth Analg. Published 19 September 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →