A Comparison of Videolaryngoscope and Direct Laryngoscope in IOP Changes, Throat Pain, IT and Hemodynamic Variables
NCT ID: NCT03279172
Last Updated: 2017-09-13
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
78 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-01-01
2017-08-04
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
The Effect of Video and Traditional Laryngoscopy on Hemodynamic Response in Hypertensive and Normotensive Patients
NCT03376828
Intubation with Different Angled Intubation Tubes Using C-macr D Blade Videolaringoscope;
NCT06011967
Videolaryngoscopy for Intubation in Patients With Diabetes
NCT03089528
Comparison of Two Different Video Laryngoscopes
NCT06649526
Comparison of Hemodynamic Changes by Using the Videolaryngoscope and the Macintosh Laryngoscope
NCT02564640
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
There are studies which have compared the hemodynamic response and increase in IOP in intubation using direct laryngoscope and various videolaryngoscopes and airway devices . However, to the best of our knowledge there is no study comparing the effect on the increase in IOP of videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope. The aim of the current study was to compare IOP, hemodynamic parameters and throat pain in the use of videolaryngoscope and the direct laryngoscope.
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
CROSSOVER
DIAGNOSTIC
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group Direct Laryngoscope
direct laryngoscope (macintosh laryngoscope) is used in elective surgeries with maximal duration time for two hours. Standard anaesthesia was used on group and BIS monitorisation was applied. A record was made of IOP, hemodynamic changes and oxygen saturation at 3 and 10 minutes after intubation. Throat pain was evaluated by questioning the patient at 10 minutes and 24 hours after waking from general anaesthesia. The duration of intubation was recorded as the time from the laryngoscope entering the mouth to removal with end-tidal carbon dioxide on the monitor. Macintosh laryingoscope, BIS monitoring and tonometry would be used in Group Direct Laryngoscope.
direct laryngoscope
procedure entubatıon
videolaryngoscope
Group videolaryngoscope
Videolaryngoscope is used in elective surgeries with maximal duration time for two hours. Standard anaesthesia was used on group and BIS monitorisation was applied. A record was made of IOP, hemodynamic changes and oxygen saturation at 3 and 10 minutes after intubation. Throat pain was evaluated by questioning the patient at 10 minutes and 24 hours after waking from general anaesthesia. The duration of intubation was recorded as the time from the laryngoscope entering the mouth to removal with end-tidal carbon dioxide on the monitor. Video laryingoscope, BIS monitoring and tonometry would be used in Group Video Laryngoscope.
direct laryngoscope
procedure entubatıon
videolaryngoscope
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
direct laryngoscope
procedure entubatıon
videolaryngoscope
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* History of hearth disease
* History of Alzheimer
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Ceyda Ozhan Caparlar
Principle investigator, Clinical Specialist of anesthesiology
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Ceyda Ozhan Caparlar
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
University of Health Dıskapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training and Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Health Dıskapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training and Hospital
Ankara, Altındag, Turkey (Türkiye)
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, Liu D, McKinney J, Choi PT. Glidescope(R) video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. 2012 Jan;59(1):41-52. doi: 10.1007/s12630-011-9620-5. Epub 2011 Nov 1.
Vinayagam S, Dhanger S, Tilak P, Gnanasekar R. C-MAC(R) video laryngoscope with D-BLADE and Frova introducer for awake intubation in a patient with parapharyngeal mass. Saudi J Anaesth. 2016 Oct-Dec;10(4):471-473. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.179118.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
22051012
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.