Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2009-07-31
2012-08-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
To perform ETI the doctor uses a metal tool called a laryngoscope that is placed through the patient's mouth to open the throat and then pass the tube into the trachea. The type of procedure that has been used for many years is called Direct Laryngoscopy (DL) which means that the doctor looks through the mouth directly into the throat. Newer technology is available and can be used at VGH called Video Laryngoscopy (VL). With VL there is a camera on the end of the laryngoscope and a video image is displayed on a monitor making it easier to see the entrance to the trachea. VL is not available for all cases at VGH and is unavailable in many other hospitals.
In this study we will compare DL to VL. Patients will be randomly placed in one of two groups: first attempt at ETI done with DL or first attempt of ETI done with DL. Patients will only be considered eligible for this study if the doctor feels that either DL or VL would be appropriate for the patient. In this pilot study we hope show that conducting a larger study would be feasible. If a larger study were to show that VL decreases complications and shortens length of ICU stay we would be able to recommend this procedure for all ETI at VGH as well as other hospitals where it currently may not be available.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Safety and Efficacy of Endotracheal Intubation Using Glidescope Video-Laryngoscope
NCT01683526
Flexible Tip Bougie Vs Tube with Stylet for Intubation with a Videolaryngoscopy in ICU (VIDEOL-FLEXTIP)
NCT05429112
Endotracheal Intubation Using Videolaryngoscopy Versus Conventional Direct Laryngoscopy
NCT04701762
Using Video Laryngoscopy for Neonatal Intubation
NCT03035175
Success of Pediatric Anesthesiologists in Learning to Use Videolaryngoscopes
NCT01215422
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Background: In the critically ill, endotracheal intubation is a high-risk procedure with complications occurring in up to 54% of patients. Our own published work has demonstrated that more than one attempt at intubation occurred in 33% of patients and was associated with a three-fold increased risk of severe complications. VL provides a superior laryngeal view when compared to DL which may translate into less failed intubations, and resultant decreased complications.
Specific objectives:
1. Determine point estimates for failure to intubate on the first attempt, which can then be used to power a larger efficacy trial examining VL vs. DL in the critically ill.
2. Compare VL vs. DL on risk of intubation failure (as defined by one than more attempt)
3. Compare VL vs. DL on number of attempts at endotracheal intubation, time-to-intubate, and risk of complications.
Methods:
1. Design: Single center, randomized-controlled pilot study
2. Patients: Forty critically ill patients requiring urgent endotracheal intubation (within 30 minutes) by the intensive care team.
3. Intervention: Patients will be randomized to initial attempt at intubation by VL vs DL.
4. Power Calculation: Given this is a pilot study to generate point estimates, power calculations have not been performed. However, 20 patients in each arm will provide a robust point estimate that can be used to power a future efficacy study.
5. Analysis: Data will be analyzed in an intention-to-treat fashion. Our primary objective, failure to intubate on the first attempt, will be analyzed using Fisher's exact test. This test will also be used to analyze the risk of complications comparing VL to DL. Number of attempts at intubation and time-to-intubation will be analyzed using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test.
6. Potential Pitfalls: As slow recruitment is always a concern, we conservatively estimate that 5 patients will be enrolled per month, thus requiring a total of 8 months for patient accrual.
Significance: If VL results in fewer complications during endotracheal intubation, then this technique may become widely adopted for this high risk procedure. Furthermore, in many centers, anesthesiology support for airway management of the critically ill may be limited, if at all present. Thus, the impact of this research may be even more applicable outside of the tertiary teaching centers where airway management expertise is readily available.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Laryngoscopy
Endotracheal Intubation
This study is comparing 2 currently accepted methods of endotracheal intubation: laryngoscopy and videolaryngoscopy
Videolaryngoscopy
Endotracheal Intubation
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Endotracheal Intubation
This study is comparing 2 currently accepted methods of endotracheal intubation: laryngoscopy and videolaryngoscopy
Endotracheal Intubation
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* cardiac arrest
* cardiopulmonary instability (oxygen saturation \<90% or systolic blood pressure \< 80 mmHg despite oxygen or fluid therapy)
* any clinical deterioration while awaiting randomization
* known prior or anticipated difficult intubation
* need for awake intubation (defined by sedation, topicalization and avoidance of neuromuscular blockade)
* pregnancy
* cervical spine precautions
* any patient deemed inappropriate for enrolment by the attending physician
16 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of British Columbia
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Donald EG Griesdale, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of British Columbia
P Choi
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
University of British Columbia
G Isac
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
University of British Columbia
V Dhingra
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
University of British Columbia
A Chau
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
University of British Columbia
C Menon
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
University of British Columbia
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Vancouver General Hospital, Intensive Care Unit
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Griesdale DE, Chau A, Isac G, Ayas N, Foster D, Irwin C, Choi P; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in critically ill patients: a pilot randomized trial. Can J Anaesth. 2012 Nov;59(11):1032-9. doi: 10.1007/s12630-012-9775-8. Epub 2012 Aug 30.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
H08-02826
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.