Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research
Abstract Background Airway management is crucial and, probably, even the most important key competence in anaesthesiology, which directly influences patient safety and outcome. However, high-quality research is rarely published and studies usually have different primary or secondary endpoints which...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2019-04-01
|
| Series: | BMC Anesthesiology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12871-019-0716-8 |
| _version_ | 1828834539068194816 |
|---|---|
| author | Jochen Hinkelbein Ivan Iovino Edoardo De Robertis Peter Kranke |
| author_facet | Jochen Hinkelbein Ivan Iovino Edoardo De Robertis Peter Kranke |
| author_sort | Jochen Hinkelbein |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Airway management is crucial and, probably, even the most important key competence in anaesthesiology, which directly influences patient safety and outcome. However, high-quality research is rarely published and studies usually have different primary or secondary endpoints which impedes clear unbiased comparisons between studies. The aim of the present study was to gather and analyse primary and secondary endpoints in video laryngoscopy studies being published over the last ten years and to create a core set of uniform or homogeneous outcomes (COS). Methods Retrospective analysis. Data were identified by using MEDLINE® database and the terms “video laryngoscopy” and “video laryngoscope” limited to the years 2007 to 2017. A total of 3351 studies were identified by the applied search strategy in PubMed. Papers were screened by two anaesthesiologists independently to identify study endpoints. The DELPHI method was used for consensus finding. Results In the 372 studies analysed and included, 49 different outcome categories/columns were reported. The items “time to intubation” (65.86%), “laryngeal view grade” (44.89%), “successful intubation rate” (36.56%), “number of intubation attempts” (23.39%), “complications” (21.24%), and “successful first-pass intubation rate” (19.09%) were reported most frequently. A total of 19 specific parameters is recommended. Conclusions In recent video laryngoscopy studies, many different and inhomogeneous parameters were used as outcome descriptors/endpoints. Based on these findings, we recommend that 19 specific parameters (e.g., “time to intubation” (inserting the laryngoscope to first ventilation), “laryngeal view grade” (C&L and POGO), “successful intubation rate”, etc.) should be used in coming research to facilitate future comparisons of video laryngoscopy studies. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-12T17:41:34Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-fd82123f7c6141649e7bc0b955d66530 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2253 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-12T17:41:34Z |
| publishDate | 2019-04-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Anesthesiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-fd82123f7c6141649e7bc0b955d665302022-12-22T00:17:04ZengBMCBMC Anesthesiology1471-22532019-04-011911910.1186/s12871-019-0716-8Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy researchJochen Hinkelbein0Ivan Iovino1Edoardo De Robertis2Peter Kranke3Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of CologneDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of CologneDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples “Federico II”Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, University Hospital of WuerzburgAbstract Background Airway management is crucial and, probably, even the most important key competence in anaesthesiology, which directly influences patient safety and outcome. However, high-quality research is rarely published and studies usually have different primary or secondary endpoints which impedes clear unbiased comparisons between studies. The aim of the present study was to gather and analyse primary and secondary endpoints in video laryngoscopy studies being published over the last ten years and to create a core set of uniform or homogeneous outcomes (COS). Methods Retrospective analysis. Data were identified by using MEDLINE® database and the terms “video laryngoscopy” and “video laryngoscope” limited to the years 2007 to 2017. A total of 3351 studies were identified by the applied search strategy in PubMed. Papers were screened by two anaesthesiologists independently to identify study endpoints. The DELPHI method was used for consensus finding. Results In the 372 studies analysed and included, 49 different outcome categories/columns were reported. The items “time to intubation” (65.86%), “laryngeal view grade” (44.89%), “successful intubation rate” (36.56%), “number of intubation attempts” (23.39%), “complications” (21.24%), and “successful first-pass intubation rate” (19.09%) were reported most frequently. A total of 19 specific parameters is recommended. Conclusions In recent video laryngoscopy studies, many different and inhomogeneous parameters were used as outcome descriptors/endpoints. Based on these findings, we recommend that 19 specific parameters (e.g., “time to intubation” (inserting the laryngoscope to first ventilation), “laryngeal view grade” (C&L and POGO), “successful intubation rate”, etc.) should be used in coming research to facilitate future comparisons of video laryngoscopy studies.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12871-019-0716-8Airway managementVideo laryngoscopyPrimary outcomePrimary endpoint |
| spellingShingle | Jochen Hinkelbein Ivan Iovino Edoardo De Robertis Peter Kranke Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research BMC Anesthesiology Airway management Video laryngoscopy Primary outcome Primary endpoint |
| title | Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research |
| title_full | Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research |
| title_fullStr | Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research |
| title_full_unstemmed | Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research |
| title_short | Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research |
| title_sort | outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017 systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research |
| topic | Airway management Video laryngoscopy Primary outcome Primary endpoint |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12871-019-0716-8 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jochenhinkelbein outcomesinvideolaryngoscopystudiesfrom2007to2017systematicreviewandanalysisofprimaryandsecondaryendpointsforacoresetofoutcomesinvideolaryngoscopyresearch AT ivaniovino outcomesinvideolaryngoscopystudiesfrom2007to2017systematicreviewandanalysisofprimaryandsecondaryendpointsforacoresetofoutcomesinvideolaryngoscopyresearch AT edoardoderobertis outcomesinvideolaryngoscopystudiesfrom2007to2017systematicreviewandanalysisofprimaryandsecondaryendpointsforacoresetofoutcomesinvideolaryngoscopyresearch AT peterkranke outcomesinvideolaryngoscopystudiesfrom2007to2017systematicreviewandanalysisofprimaryandsecondaryendpointsforacoresetofoutcomesinvideolaryngoscopyresearch |