• Middle East J Anaesthesiol · Jun 2003

    Comparative Study

    Comparison of two methods for predicting difficult intubation in obstetric patients.

    • S Gupta, S Pareek, and S C Dulara.
    • Department of Anaesthesiology and Resuscitation RNT Medical College, Udaipur-313001. sunandagupta@hotmail.com
    • Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 2003 Jun 1;17(2):275-85.

    AbstractPreoperative airway assessment for prediction of difficult laryngoscopy and intubation was done using the modified Mallampati test and Wilson risk sum score in three hundred and seventy two obstetric patients undergoing elective as well as emergency Cesarean section under general anesthesia. 25 (6.7%) patients had laryngoscopy grade III or IV of whom 24 (6.4%) patients were difficult at tracheal intubation. Mallampati class III or IV predicted 15 of the 23 patients while Wilson risk sum score > or = 2 predicted 9 of the 14 patients in whom tracheal intubation was difficult. As a screening test for prediction of difficult intubation Wilson risk sum score was less sensitive (36%) but had almost same specificity (98.5%) and positive predictive value (64%) in comparison to modified Mallampati test (62.5%, 97.7% and 65% respectively). When used as a predictor of difficult laryngoscopy sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value for modified Mallampati test were 60%, 97.6% and 65% respectively and for Wilson risk sum they were 36%, 98.5% and 64% respectively, but when both tests were combined as predictors (with either of tests positive) sensitivity improved to 100% while specificity was marginally decreased to 96.2% and positive predictive value (64.8%) remained almost the same. There was no significant association between age and laryngoscopy grade III or IV but there was significant (P < 0.01) relationship with weight and external laryngeal manipulation. The advantage of the above tests lies in, incorporating them into the preoperative protocol, rather than using them as sole predictors of difficult laryngoscopy and intubation.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.