• Joan Roberts, Taylor Sawyer, Donald Foubare, Jennifer Reid, Kimberly Stone, Don Stephanian, and Douglas Thompson.
• Pediatric Critical Care, Seattle Children's Hospital.
• Cureus. 2015 Jan 1;7(9):e331.

IntroductionTo provide an informed choice of equipment purchase, we sought to use simulation to allow medical providers an opportunity to evaluate two potential laryngoscopes.MethodsThe study followed a prospective, blinded comparison design. Participants were blinded to the laryngoscope brands by using alphabetic labels on the handles ("A" and "B"). Participants included a convenience sample of healthcare providers who perform intubation. Participants were allowed to perform intubation with the two laryngoscope brands on neonatal, child, and adolescent/adult airway simulators. After practicing with each of the two different laryngoscopes, participants completed an evaluation indicating their preference for one laryngoscope versus the other for each patient age group.ResultsThirty-four healthcare providers participated in the study, including attendings, fellows, nurse practitioners, and transport team members from Neonatology, Pediatric Intensive Care, Anesthesiology, Emergency Medicine, Cardiac Intensive Care, and Otolaryngology. Participants overwhelmingly preferred brand 'A' (89%) over brand 'B' (11%).DiscussionProviders overwhelmingly chose one laryngoscope over the other. Data from this evaluation were used to determine which of the two laryngoscope brands was purchased. Based on our experience, we feel other hospitals should consider the use of simulation to allow providers to examine, compare, and rate medical equipment prior to making purchasing decisions.

4 keywords...

hide…