We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Comparison of 4 supraglotttic devices used by paramedics during simulated CPR : a randomized controlled crossover trial.
American Journal of Emergency Medicine 2015 August
BACKGROUND: Ensuring an open airway during cardiopulmonary resuscitation is fundamental. The aim of this study was to determine the success rate of blind intubation during simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation by untrained personnel.
METHODS: Four devices were compared in a simulated resuscitation scenario: ILMA (Intavent Direct Ltd, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom), Cobra PLA (Engineered Medical Systems Inc, Indianapolis, IN), Supraglottic Airway Laryngopharyngeal Tube (SALT) (ECOLAB, St. Paul, MN), and Air-Q (Mercury Medical, Clearwater, FL). A group of 210 paramedics intubated a manikin with continuous chest compressions.
RESULTS: The mean times to intubation were 40.46 ± 4.64, 33.96 ± 6.23, 17.2 ± 4.63, and 49.23 ± 13.19 seconds (SALT vs ILMA, Cobra PLA, and Air-Q; P < .05). The success ratios of blind intubation for the devices were 86.7%, 85.7%, 100%, and 71.4% (SALT vs ILMA, Cobra PLA, and Air-Q; P < .05).
CONCLUSION: The study showed that the most efficient device with the shortest blind intubation time was the SALT device.
METHODS: Four devices were compared in a simulated resuscitation scenario: ILMA (Intavent Direct Ltd, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom), Cobra PLA (Engineered Medical Systems Inc, Indianapolis, IN), Supraglottic Airway Laryngopharyngeal Tube (SALT) (ECOLAB, St. Paul, MN), and Air-Q (Mercury Medical, Clearwater, FL). A group of 210 paramedics intubated a manikin with continuous chest compressions.
RESULTS: The mean times to intubation were 40.46 ± 4.64, 33.96 ± 6.23, 17.2 ± 4.63, and 49.23 ± 13.19 seconds (SALT vs ILMA, Cobra PLA, and Air-Q; P < .05). The success ratios of blind intubation for the devices were 86.7%, 85.7%, 100%, and 71.4% (SALT vs ILMA, Cobra PLA, and Air-Q; P < .05).
CONCLUSION: The study showed that the most efficient device with the shortest blind intubation time was the SALT device.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app