Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway versus Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation in the Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Environment

Timothy S. Talbot, Peter J. Cuenca, Ian S. Wedmore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: Intubation is a difficult skill under normal circumstances and more so with a limited visual field such as wearing a protective mask in a chemical or biological incident. This study sought to determine whether successful intubation using the intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) under protective mask conditions was equivalent to standard endotracheal intubation. Methods: A pilot study was conducted using emergency medicine personnel. Participant's attempted intubation of a manikin while wearing a standard U.S. Army M-40 protective mask. Two attempts were performed with each method. Results: One hundred percent of the ILMA placements were successful with only 78% success with endotracheal intubation (p = 0.1). Time to successful intubation and ventilation was significantly less for the ILMA versus endotracheal intubation (p = 0.005). Conclusion: This study suggests that under simulated chemical and biological conditions using an M-40 protective mask, intubation is accomplished faster and with more success with the ILMA.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)876-879
Number of pages4
JournalMilitary medicine
Volume168
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2003
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway versus Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation in the Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Environment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this