Comparison of the rapidity of Endotracheal Intubation by BOUGIE with ILMA on a difficult manikin by emergency residents

Abstract

The use of bogey guides as well as the use of ILMA are two methods that have been introduced to ease and reduce the complications of oral intubation. The superiority of these two approaches to each other has not been compared in one study. Materials and Methods: The information of each participant is initially recorded along with individual demographics. It then intubates once with the help of bogey and again with ILMA. The time of intubation is recorded in the method of using bogey from the time of laryngoscopy to endotracheal tube filling and confirmation of successful intubation with lung expansion. The ILMA procedure records the time from ILMA insertion until completion of intubation and cuff filling and confirmation of successful intubation with lung expansion. Time recording will be with stopwatch. Either way, it fails if it fails to intubate after three attempts. Results: In this study, 80 patients were included in the study. The mean age of patients was 33.14 83 3.83 years. Among 25 patients (31.3%) were able to perform intubation successfully with normal endotracheal intubation and 55 (68.8%) patients had unsuccessful intubation. The tube placement time was 36.52 9 9.84 seconds. Only 32 participants (40%) were able to successfully perform endotracheal tube placement with boogie. ILMA endotracheal placement was successful by 77 (96.3%). Thus, intubation with ILMA was less time consuming than the other two methods and intubation with bogie less than intubation without auxiliary device.