• Ian S Wedmore, Timothy S Talbo, and Peter J Cuenca.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center-University of Washington Emergency Medicine Residency, Fort Lewis, WA 98234, USA.
• Mil Med. 2003 Nov 1;168(11):876-9.

ObjectiveIntubation is a difficult skill under normal circumstances and more so with a limited visual field such as wearing a protective mask in a chemical or biological incident. This study sought to determine whether successful intubation using the intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) under protective mask conditions was equivalent to standard endotracheal intubation.MethodsA pilot study was conducted using emergency medicine personnel. Participant's attempted intubation of a manikin while wearing a standard U.S. Army M-40 protective mask. Two attempts were performed with each method.ResultsOne hundred percent of the ILMA placements were successful with only 78% success with endotracheal intubation (p = 0.1). Time to successful intubation and ventilation was significantly less for the ILMA versus endotracheal intubation (p = 0.005).ConclusionThis study suggests that under simulated chemical and biological conditions using an M-40 protective mask, intubation is accomplished faster and with more success with the ILMA.

15 keywords...

hide…