Validation of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope utility as an intubation device during cardiopulmonary resuscitation on the ground

Abstract

We conclude that the AWS is an effective device for endotracheal intubation during chest compression not only on the bed but also on the ground.

Tracheal intubation during chest compressions using Pentax-AWS®, GlideScope®, and Macintosh laryngoscope: a randomized crossover trial using a mannequin

“…9 Moreover, overall success rates were significantly lower with the Macintosh laryngoscope than with the Pentax-AWS. 7,8,10 Success rates of 100% have been reported for the Pentax-AWS compared with success rates of 57.1%, 8 74.3%, 10 and 81.3% 7 reported for the Macintosh. 8 In the present study, the overall success rate for the Macintosh laryngoscope was similar to that of the Pentax-AWS in a normal airway scenario (96.9% vs 100%, respectively).…”

“…[7][8][9][10][14][15][16] The laryngoscopes employed in the majority of these previous studies were the conventional Macintosh laryngoscope and the Pentax-AWS. [7][8][9][10]14,15 While four studies [7][8][9][10] reported that the Pentax-AWS was more effective than the Macintosh laryngoscope, two studies 14,15 reported no significant difference.…”

“…Les donne´es suivantes ont e´te´mesure´es et enregistre´es : temps jusqu'a`intubation trache´ale re´ussie (crite`re d'e´valuation principal), taux de re´ussite global, temps jusqu'a`visualisation des cordes vocales, pourcentage d'ouverture glottique, compression dentaire et facilited 'intubation. Résultats Dans les cas de voies ae´riennes normales, les temps (moyenne [e´cart interquartile]) jusqu'a`intubation trache´ale e´taient plus courts avec le Pentax-AWS (12,1 [10,1-14,4] sec) et le GlideScope (14,3 [12,[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]6] sec) qu'avec le laryngoscope Macintosh (16,5 [13,,1] sec) (P \ 0,03 pour les deux). La diffe´rence de temps entre les deux vide´olaryngoscopes n'e´tait pas significative d'un point de vue statistique.…”

“…7 In other studies, it has been reported that the Pentax-AWS is a more effective device than the Macintosh laryngoscope for the performance of tracheal intubation during uninterrupted chest compressions. [8][9][10] The GlideScope Ò (Verathon Ò , Bothell, WA, USA) is another popular indirect laryngoscope developed for the management of difficult airways. Studies have demonstrated that the GlideScope may provide a better laryngoscopic view than direct laryngoscopy, 11 and it may be advantageous for tracheal intubation in patients with a difficult airway.…”

Comparison of the utility of the Pentax Airway Scope (AWS) with that of the conventional Macintosh laryngoscope during chest compression: is the AWS an easy‐to‐use device for a novice?

“…The authors mentioned that the operator skills based on an adequate amount of experience would influence their results. However, Komasawa et al 8 proposed that the AWS requires less operator skill. Considering these past findings, it appears that the AWS will be useful to achieve successful tracheal intubation during chest compression compared to MCL even if the operator is a novice.…”