Abstract
Videolaryngoscopes are becoming widely available and have been suggested as a replacement for the Macintosh in cases of cervical instability or even for use in the first instance. There is limited existing data on the use of videoscopes by experienced anaesthetists who are inexperienced in the use of videoscopes. We used a manikin model to compare time to intubation between the Macintosh blade, Pentax Airway Scope® and the McGrath® videolaiyngoscope in a simulated urgent intubation by 23 experienced anaesthetists with no prior experience in the use of these videoscopes. We also measured the number of attempts and success of intubation within three minutes. Ease of device use and laiyngoscopic view obtained were also recorded. We found that all participants could intubate the manikin within three minutes, with a median of one attempt using the Pentax Airway Scope® 48% of participants (n = 11) could intubate within three minutes using the McGrath® videolaiyngoscope and required a median of three attempts. This difference occurred despite the majority of anaesthetists obtaining a Grade 1 Cormack and Lehane view with both videoscopes. We demonstrated that anaesthetists who were naive to these videoscopes can successfully intubate the trachea using the Pentax Airway Scope® but not the McGrath® videolaryngoscope.