Pre Hospital Evaluation of Video Laryngoscopy (EVE)

Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris

Status and phase: Withdrawn; Phase 4

Conditions: Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Shock; Trauma, Nervous System; Acute Post-trauma Stress State; Cardiac Arrest; Drug Toxicity

Treatments: Device: GLIDESCOPE; Device: Classical intubation

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT01374061

2010-A01512-37 (Other Identifier)

P100205

Details and patient eligibility

About

The objective of this work is to compare standard intubation with video laryngoscope (Glide scope Ranger ) in French pre hospital multicentric study.

Full description

Introduction: In France, patients in critical status brought to hospital by emergency physicians and nurses experimented in tracheal intubation. It is an invasive act allowing a protection of airways and an optimal oxygenation of the patients in distress. The reference technique is the direct laryngoscopy by Macintosh . Corresponding data shows that a video laryngoscope - GLIDESCOPE laryngoscope - improve the conditions of intubation in the surgical unit thanks to a better display(visualization) of the opening. A derived device for pre hospital emergency units (GLIDESCOPE Ranger®) deserves to be compared with the classic laryngoscopy in emergency conditions.

Objectives: compare the emergency intubation in Pre hospital meadow by Glide Scope Ranger with regard to the classic method

Progress of the study: the patients will be included by emergency physicians working in out of hospital teams of 3 major hospitals of Paris. The patients will be randomized in 2 groups: 1 group classic laryngoscopy (group 1) and a group Glide scope Ranger (group 2). The score IDS will be compared for every group as well as the arisen of a complication during the procedure. The consent will be collected on the place or during the hospitalization.

Sex: All

Ages: 18+ years old

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• patients of more than 18 years old
• requiring an intubation
• by medical out of hospital emergency operators
• medical insurance
• Consent signed

Exclusion criteria

• Age <18, pregnant women
• Refusal of consent or inability for understanding study
• small mouth opening makes it impossible intubate

Trial design

Primary purpose: Treatment

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Single Group Assignment

Masking: None (Open label)

---

0 participants in 2 patient groups

1: Classical intubation

Active Comparator group

Treatment:

Device: Classical intubation

2: Glidescope intubation

Experimental group

Treatment:

Device: GLIDESCOPE