• Mami Shimada, Yoshihiro Hirabayashi, and Toru Ehara.
• Masui. 2015 Aug 1; 64 (8): 873-8.

BackgroundThe aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of the Pentax-AWS for tracheal intubation during chest compression, compared with that of the Macintosh laryngoscope.MethodsThe systematic search, data extraction, critical appraisal, and pooled analysis were performed according the PRISMA statement. The relative risk (RR), mean difference (MD), and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by the Review Manager 5.2 software for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively.ResultsTwelve trials included 424 tracheal intubations by Pentax-AWS and 421 tracheal intubations by Macintosh laryngoscope. In studies examining novice laryngoscopists, successful intubation (RR1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, P < 0.0007) and time for instrumentation (MD -7.7 sec, 95% CI -10.1 sec--5.4 sec, P < 0.00001) were improved using the Pentax-AWS. With respect to experts' hands there was no difference between the two devices in both of these outcomes.ConclusionsCompared to the Macintosh laryngoscopy, Pentax-AWS offers advantages for novice laryngoscopists during chest compression, while these benefits are not seen with experts' hands.

10 keywords...

hide…