• Lorri M Phipps, Neal J Thomas, Raymond K Gilmore, Jill A Raymond, Toni R Bittner, Richard A Orr, and Courtney L Robertson.
• Department of Pediatrics, Division of Nursing, Penn State Children's Hospital, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
• Pediatr Crit Care Me. 2005 Sep 1; 6 (5): 519-22.

ObjectiveTo determine whether multiplying the internal diameter of the endotracheal tube (ETT) by 3 (3x ETT size) is a reliable method for determining correct depth of oral ETT placement in the pediatric population.DesignProspective, observational.SettingUniversity-affiliated, 12-bed pediatric intensive care unit.PatientsOrally intubated pediatric intensive care unit patients of < or =12 yrs of age.InterventionsDemographics, ETT size, and depth of ETT placement measured from the lip were obtained. Correct placement, defined as the tip of the ETT below the thoracic inlet and > or =0.5 cm above the carina, was determined by chest radiograph.Measurements And Main ResultsSuggested ETT size based on the Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) age-based formula and the Broselow tape-length-based guidelines were determined. A total of 174 of 226 ETTs (77%) were correctly positioned. If practitioners utilized the 3x ETT size for the actual tubes chosen, 170 of 226 (75%) would have been accurately placed. More accurate were the 3x PALS-based ETT size (81%) and 3x Broselow-suggested ETT size (85%). The use of the Broselow ETTs to determine the depth would have led to a significantly improved ETT position (p = .009) compared with the actual ETT.ConclusionThe commonly used formula of 3x tube size for ETT depth in children results in 15-25% malpositioned tubes. Practitioners can improve the reliability of this formula by utilizing the recommended ETT size as suggested by the Broselow tape. A more reliable method is necessary to avoid ETT malposition.

19 keywords...

hide…