English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this study, we compared the performance characteristics of Macintosh laryngoscope, CMAC videolaryngoscope with a recently developed videolaryngoscope called Smart Trach. Three hundred seventy-five patients belonging to mixed population without having anticipated difficult airways undergoing elective surgeries were randomly allocated to be intubated using either of the three laryngoscopes (Macintosh, CMAC, or Smart Trach). Time needed for successful intubation, number of attempts, Cormack Lehane’s (CL) grading, optimization maneuverers, intubation difficulty score (IDS), subjective ease of intubation (VAS), subjective lifting force, and complications were recorded. Demographic and anthropometric measurements (sex, height, weight, and body mass index) among the groups were comparable. CL grades, lifting force, IDS, VAS, and intubation times (seconds) were significantly different whereas need for maneuver, attempts, and complications was similar (p &gt; 0.05 each). Intubation times (seconds) were significantly different between Macintosh [36(29–43) seconds], CMAC [30(24–37)], and Smart Trach [35(30–42] groups. (p &lt; 0.001). Subjective ease of intubation based on VAS score was lowest in Smart trach group [1(1–2)] (p &lt; 0.001). Shortest intubation times were achieved with CMAC with least use of lifting force. First attempt success rates of were similar. Intubation was easiest subjectively using Smart Trach as manifested by lowest VAS and IDS. Clinical Trial registry of India (CTRI/2019/09/021279 dated 17/09/2019)

expert review of medical devices

A comparison of endotracheal intubation characteristics between Macintosh, CMAC, and Smart Trach Video laryngoscope: a randomized prospective clinical trial