King Vision Video Laryngoscope Versus Glidescope Video Laryngoscope
Status
Conditions
Treatments
Details and patient eligibility
About
The investigators plan to conduct a randomized trial comparing the intubation success rate and time of the King Vision Video Laryngoscope to the Glidescope video laryngoscope in order to demonstrate the comparability of the devices.
Full description
Both the King Vision and Glidescope video laryngoscopes are advanced airway devices that are relatively low cost and are designed to improve the efficiency of both routine and difficult intubation. Both systems use disposable blades, which eliminates the need for blade sterilization and may minimize the risk of infectious exposure to patients and improve cost and efficiency associated with the sterilization processing of non-disposable laryngoscopes. The Glidescope has been commercially available longer than the King Vision, and has been more frequently studied.
Although similar in many respects, the King Vision and Glidescope systems have differing designs which may result in differences in speed and success in the management of routine and/or difficult airways.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
- Adult patients scheduled for elective, ambulatory surgery requiring general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation
Exclusion criteria
- Patients who require rapid sequence induction and intubation or fiberoptic intubation.
- Pregnancy
Trial design
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
40 participants in 2 patient groups
Trial contacts and locations
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal