Scholarlink

Background <p>In recent years, Taiwan’s medical education has increasingly emphasized simulated learning, particularly through advanced manikins designed for procedural training, including endotracheal intubation. Although key indicators and predictive techniques for assessing complexity have been documented, their use in evaluating these manikins remains notably lacking.The aim of this study was to appraise the potential association between our devised scoring system and the actual outcome of intubation procedures. Subsequently, this scoring system could potentially serve as an objective yardstick for quantifying the intricacy of training simulators.</p> Methods <p>Nineteen post-graduate or emergency medicine trainees participated in this study. Intubation training involved four manikins, each with varying difficulty scores based on neck circumference, thyromental distance, airway obstruction, and Mallampati grade 3/4. Training modules included standard, advanced, and small adult intubation. Independent variables were training models and operator skill levels, while dependent variables included intubation time, success rate, tooth injury, gastric insufflation, uninflated cuff mishaps, perceived difficulty (rated 1–5), and laryngoscopy view quality (rated 1–4).</p> Results and discussion <p>Intubation parameters were recorded for comparison across subgroups. Mean intubation times for models A, B, and D were 42.67 ± 15.32 <i>seconds</i>, 48.73 ± 17.54 <i>seconds</i>, and 50.22 ± 18.40 <i>seconds</i>, with success rates of 89.47%, 78.95%, and 68.42%, respectively. Model ‘C’ had the highest difficulty score (4.430 <i>points</i>), the longest intubation time (58.84 ± 22.63 <i>seconds</i>, <i>P</i> &lt;.001), and the lowest success rate (57.89%, <i>P</i> &lt;.001), and was rated most difficult by participants. Notably, subsequent intubation attempts showed reduced time and complexity compared to the initial one.In conclusions, our devised scoring metric demonstrated a remarkable congruence with the tangible outcomes of the challenging endotracheal intubation training model. This outcome lends credence to the potential applicability of our formula not only in assessing the intricacy of existing models but also as a guiding benchmark for the innovation and refinement of novel training manikins.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Using the predictive model of difficult endotracheal intubation to examine different simulators for airway management training: a pilot cross-sectional observational study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月6日

查看全文
  • Ching-Hsiang Yu,
  • En-Chih Liao,
  • Yat-Pang Chau,
  • Ming-Kun Huang,
  • Ching-Yi Shen,
  • Ding-Kuo Chien

摘要

Background

In recent years, Taiwan’s medical education has increasingly emphasized simulated learning, particularly through advanced manikins designed for procedural training, including endotracheal intubation. Although key indicators and predictive techniques for assessing complexity have been documented, their use in evaluating these manikins remains notably lacking.The aim of this study was to appraise the potential association between our devised scoring system and the actual outcome of intubation procedures. Subsequently, this scoring system could potentially serve as an objective yardstick for quantifying the intricacy of training simulators.

Methods

Nineteen post-graduate or emergency medicine trainees participated in this study. Intubation training involved four manikins, each with varying difficulty scores based on neck circumference, thyromental distance, airway obstruction, and Mallampati grade 3/4. Training modules included standard, advanced, and small adult intubation. Independent variables were training models and operator skill levels, while dependent variables included intubation time, success rate, tooth injury, gastric insufflation, uninflated cuff mishaps, perceived difficulty (rated 1–5), and laryngoscopy view quality (rated 1–4).

Results and discussion

Intubation parameters were recorded for comparison across subgroups. Mean intubation times for models A, B, and D were 42.67 ± 15.32 seconds, 48.73 ± 17.54 seconds, and 50.22 ± 18.40 seconds, with success rates of 89.47%, 78.95%, and 68.42%, respectively. Model ‘C’ had the highest difficulty score (4.430 points), the longest intubation time (58.84 ± 22.63 seconds, P <.001), and the lowest success rate (57.89%, P <.001), and was rated most difficult by participants. Notably, subsequent intubation attempts showed reduced time and complexity compared to the initial one.In conclusions, our devised scoring metric demonstrated a remarkable congruence with the tangible outcomes of the challenging endotracheal intubation training model. This outcome lends credence to the potential applicability of our formula not only in assessing the intricacy of existing models but also as a guiding benchmark for the innovation and refinement of novel training manikins.