Evidence Hub

A comparison of direct laryngoscopy and jaw thrust to aid fibreoptic intubation

Stacey MR, Rassam S, Sivasankar R, Hall JE, Latto IP

Anaesthesia, 2005

50 participants

Abstract

We compared two manoeuvres, jaw thrust and laryngoscopy, to open the airway during fibreoptic intubation in 50 patients after induction of anaesthesia in a crossover study. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either jaw thrust or conventional Macintosh laryngoscopy first. Airway clearance was assessed at both the soft palate and the epiglottis. Direct laryngoscopy provided significantly better airway clearance at the level of the soft palate than jaw thrust (44 (88%) vs 31 (62%), respectively; p = 0.002). At the level of the larynx, airway clearance was equally good in both groups (45 (90%) vs 46 (92%), respectively; p = 0.56). The times to view the larynx (median (interquartile range [range]) 4 (3-5 [2-35]) s vs 3 (3-4 [2-8]) s, respectively) and intubation time (20 (17-23 [11-83]) s vs 18 (15-20 [11-28]) s, respectively) were also similar.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 50 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free