A Prospective,Randomised, Open Label Study for Comparison of the Incidence and Severity of Postoperative Sore Throat (POST) Using C-MAC Video Laryngoscope and Traditional Macintosh Laryngoscope for Intubation

Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College

Status: Completed

Conditions: Hoarseness of Voice; Sore-throat

Treatments: Procedure: Intubation

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT05531617

EC/202/2018

Details and patient eligibility

About

The aim of this study is to compare the incidence of postoperative sore throat after intubation with two different types of laryngoscopes.

Full description

Postoperative sore throat is a well known complication after endotracheal intubation. One of the major contributing factors is trauma associated with laryngoscopy. With decreased force applied to visualise cords, video laryngoscopes should decrease the incidence of postoperative sore throat. In this study we compared the incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat when laryngoscopy was done using c-mac video laryngoscope D-blade( group V) versus Macintosh laryngoscope (Group M). Method: Fifty four American society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) 1&2 patients between age 18-60 years , undergoing laproscopic surgeries of short duration were included in this study and laryngoscopy was done with Macintosh laryngoscope in M group and with C MAC video laryngoscope D blade in V group. Patients were followed up 2hours, 6hours, 12hours and 24hours in postoperative period to see postoperative sore throat and hoarseness of voice .

Enrollment: 54 patients

Sex: All

Ages: 18 to 60 years old

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• Age more than 18 years
• American society of Anaesthesiologists(ASA)1 and 2
• Mallampati (MPC) grading 1 and 2
• laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendectomy
• Surgeries of short duration(<2hour)

Exclusion criteria

• Patients refusing to give consent
• Pregnant and lactating patients
• Patients with severe co-morbidities requiring postoperative ventilatory support

Trial design

Primary purpose: Screening

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: None (Open label)

---

54 participants in 2 patient groups

M group

Active Comparator group

Description:

Group Intubated with Macintosh laryngoscope is labelled as M group

Treatment:

Procedure: Intubation

V group

Active Comparator group

Description:

Group Intubated with C-Mac video laryngoscope is labelled as V group

Treatment:

Procedure: Intubation