Premium
The Tulip GT ® airway versus the facemask and Guedel airway: a randomised, controlled, cross‐over study by Basic Life Support‐trained airway providers in anaesthetised patients
Author(s) -
Shaikh A.,
Robinson P.N.,
Hasan M.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
anaesthesia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.839
H-Index - 117
eISSN - 1365-2044
pISSN - 0003-2409
DOI - 10.1111/anae.13328
Subject(s) - medicine , airway , tidal volume , anesthesia , ventilation (architecture) , airway management , respiratory system , mechanical engineering , engineering
Summary We performed a randomised, controlled, cross‐over study of lung ventilation by Basic Life Support‐trained providers using either the Tulip GT ® airway or a facemask with a Guedel airway in 60 anaesthetised patients. Successful ventilation was achieved if the provider produced an end‐tidal CO 2 > 3.5 kPa and a tidal volume > 250 ml in two of the first three breaths, within 60 sec and within two attempts. Fifty‐seven (95%) providers achieved successful ventilation using the Tulip GT compared with 35 (58%) using the facemask (p < 0.0001). Comparing the Tulip GT and facemask, the mean ( SD ) end‐tidal CO 2 was 5.0 (0.7) kPa vs 2.5 (1.5) kPa, tidal volume was 494 (175) ml vs 286 (186) ml and peak inspiratory pressure was 18.3 (3.4) cmH 2 O vs 13.6 (7) cmH 2 O respectively (all p < 0.0001). Forty‐seven (78%) users favoured the Tulip GT airway. These results are similar to a previous manikin study using the same protocol, suggesting a close correlation between human and manikin studies for this airway device. We conclude that the Tulip GT should be considered as an adjunct to airway management both within and outside hospitals when ventilation is being undertaken by Basic Life Support‐trained airway providers.