• Marcin Cierniak, Dariusz Timler, Andrzej Wieczorek, Przemyslaw Sekalski, Natalia Borkowska, and Tomasz Gaszynski.
• Department of Emergency Medicine and Disaster Medicine, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Lodz, Ul. Kopcinskiego 22, 90-153, Lodz, Poland.
• J Clin Monit Comput. 2016 Aug 1; 30 (4): 379-87.

AbstractCurrently, there are plenty of videolaryngoscopes that appear on the market. They have different specifications. Some of these features favor the fact that they are more suited for educational purposes of future operators and others can be characterized with an excellent clinical use. In this study we compared four types of videolaryngoscopes. The aim of the study was to compare the technical specifications of the above-mentioned devices for usefulness in clinical practice and correlate these parameters with the subjective evaluation of these videolaryngoscopes usage performed in practice by an experienced medical staff. All devices considered in this study participated in another multicenter clinical study on the basis of which we completed the subjective evaluation of the operators. In order to examine the technical parameters of the equipment we established the cooperation with the Department of Microelectronics at Technical University of Lodz. Mechanical and optical parameters and the endoscopic tube current were taken into consideration. The C-MAC has a camera with the widest viewing angle (the OX axis-63.1, the axis OY-47.8), which in combination with the largest diagonal size of the display enables the operator to see the details relevant to clinical practice. It has also the strongest lamp intensity of the devices mentioned in this comparison (7800 Lx). In comparison of the clinical use in almost all compared parameters the Cmac D-blade is a winner, although for clinical education purpose we consider the Vividtrac a better device.

16 keywords...

hide…