Home > Journals > Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia

Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia

Submit your article Read this Journals View all journals
Full Text (PDF)
Original Article

Comparison of Intubating Conditions, Efficacy and Safety of Airtraq Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope: A Randomized Controlled Trial

P. Aravind Kumar, Assistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, Govt. Mohan Kumaramangalam Medical College, Salem, Tamil Nadu 636001, India. , P. Aravind Kumar1 , G. Dilish2

Author Information

Licence:



Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia 5(5):p 713-718, May 2018. | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.5518.3

How Cite This Article:

Timeline

Received : N/A         Accepted : N/A          Published : N/A

Abstract

 

 

Context: Considering the potential difficulties associated with conventional laryngoscopy in difficult incubating conditions, airway devices that increase the ease of performing can have a profound clinical impact.

Aim: The current study compared the efficacy and safety of AirTraq (AirTraqR, Prodol Meditec, Vizcaya, Spain)l aryngoscope with Macintosh laryngoscope.

Settings and Design: The current study was aProspective, Randomized, single-blind controlled trial, conducted in Govt. Mohan Kumaramangalam Medical College Hospital, Salem, between May 2015 and January 2016. Total of 60 subjects requiring endotracheal anesthesia were randomly allocated to AirTraqR or Macintosh laryngoscope groups. Cormack-Lehane and Intubation Difficulty Score, intubating time, hemodynamic parameters and complication rate were compared.

Statistical methods used: Independent sample t-test. chi Square test/Fisher’s exact test and two way repeated measures ANOVA were used appropriately.

Results: Both groups were comparable in all the baseline parameters. The intubation difficulty score (1.47 Vs 0.17, p value < 0.001) and duration of intubation (17.2 Vs 11.03, p value < 0.001) were significantly higher in Macintosh group as compared to AirTraqR. AirTraqRgroup had a higher proportion of subjects in CL grade 1 (93% vs 43.3%, P value < 0.001). The proportion of subjects with airway trauma was also higher in Macintosh group (6.67% vs 10%, P value 0.64) as compared to AirTraqR group. A higher proportion of subjects in AirTraqR group were in Operator Grade I (93.3% Vs 66.7%). The hemodynamic parameters were comparable between the two groups.

 

 

Conclusions: AirTraqR laryngoscope shall be considered ahead of Macintosh laryngoscope, where ever feasible.

 

 

 


 

 

References

No records found.


About this article

Cite this article

Licence:



Received Accepted Published
N/A N/A N/A
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.5518.3

Keywords

Airtraq Laryngoscope; Macintosh Laryngoscope; Airtraq Vs Macintosh. 

Article Level Metrics

Last Updated

Saturday 07 February 2026, 21:08:49 (IST)

1189

Accesses

1
194
00

Citations


NA
NA
NA

Download citation


Article Keywords

Keyword Highlighting

Highlight selected keywords in the article text.


Timeline

Received N/A
Accepted N/A
Published N/A

licence




Access this article

Reprint Order Form
Buy this Article
Institutional Subscriptions

Share