PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of respiratory protective equipment for clinicians performing airway management.
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the impact of powered air-purifying respirators, full-face air-purifying respirators and filtering facepieces on specially trained anaesthesiologists performing difficult airway procedures.
UNASSIGNED: All our COVID-19 intubation team members carried out various difficult intubation drills: unprotected, wearing a full-face respirator, a filtering facepiece or a powered respirator. Airway management times and wearer comfort were evaluated and analysed.
UNASSIGNED: Total mean (SD) intubation times did not show significant differences between the control, the powered, the full-face respirator and the filtering facepiece groups: Airtraq 6.1 (4.4) vs. 5.4 (3.1) vs. 6.1 (5.6) vs. 7.7 (7.6) s; videolaryngoscopy 11.4 (9.0) vs. 7.7 (4.3) vs. 9.8 (8.4) vs. 12.7 (9.8) s; fibreoptic intubation 16.6 (7.8) vs.13.8 (6.7) vs. 13.6 (8.1) vs. 16.9 (9.2) s; and standard endotracheal intubation by direct laryngoscopy 8.1 (3.5) vs. 6.5 (5.6) vs. 6.2 (4.2) vs. 8.0 (4.4) s, respectively. Use of the Airtraq achieved the shortest intubation times. Anaesthesiologists rated temperature and vision significantly better in the powered respirator group.
UNASSIGNED: Advanced airway management remains unaffected by the respiratory protective equipment used if performed by a specially trained, designated team. We conclude that when advanced airway skills are performed by a designated, specially trained team, airway management times remain unaffected by the respiratory protective equipment used.
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the impact of powered air-purifying respirators, full-face air-purifying respirators and filtering facepieces on specially trained anaesthesiologists performing difficult airway procedures.
UNASSIGNED: All our COVID-19 intubation team members carried out various difficult intubation drills: unprotected, wearing a full-face respirator, a filtering facepiece or a powered respirator. Airway management times and wearer comfort were evaluated and analysed.
UNASSIGNED: Total mean (SD) intubation times did not show significant differences between the control, the powered, the full-face respirator and the filtering facepiece groups: Airtraq 6.1 (4.4) vs. 5.4 (3.1) vs. 6.1 (5.6) vs. 7.7 (7.6) s; videolaryngoscopy 11.4 (9.0) vs. 7.7 (4.3) vs. 9.8 (8.4) vs. 12.7 (9.8) s; fibreoptic intubation 16.6 (7.8) vs.13.8 (6.7) vs. 13.6 (8.1) vs. 16.9 (9.2) s; and standard endotracheal intubation by direct laryngoscopy 8.1 (3.5) vs. 6.5 (5.6) vs. 6.2 (4.2) vs. 8.0 (4.4) s, respectively. Use of the Airtraq achieved the shortest intubation times. Anaesthesiologists rated temperature and vision significantly better in the powered respirator group.
UNASSIGNED: Advanced airway management remains unaffected by the respiratory protective equipment used if performed by a specially trained, designated team. We conclude that when advanced airway skills are performed by a designated, specially trained team, airway management times remain unaffected by the respiratory protective equipment used.
摘要：
■COVID-19大流行突显了呼吸防护设备对进行气道管理的临床医生的重要性。
■为了评估动力空气净化呼吸器的影响，全脸空气净化呼吸器和过滤面罩在经过专门培训的麻醉师执行困难的气道程序。
■我们所有的COVID-19插管小组成员都进行了各种困难的插管演练：无保护，戴着全脸呼吸器,过滤面罩或电动呼吸器。评估并分析了气道管理时间和佩戴者的舒适度。
■总平均（SD）插管时间在对照组之间没有显着差异，动力，全脸呼吸器和过滤面罩组：Airtraq6.1（4.4）与5.4（3.1）vs.6.1（5.6）与7.7(7.6)s;视频喉镜检查11.4(9.0)vs.7.7（4.3）vs.9.8（8.4）vs.12.7(9.8)s;纤维插管16.6(7.8)vs.13.8(6.7)vs.13.6（8.1）vs.16.9（9.2）s；直接喉镜下标准气管插管8.1（3.5）与6.5（5.6）vs.6.2(4.2)vs.8.0(4.4)s,分别。使用Airtraq实现了最短的插管时间。麻醉师对电动呼吸器组的温度和视力进行了评估。
■高级气道管理不受经过专门培训的呼吸防护设备的影响，指定团队。我们得出的结论是，当高级气道技能由指定的人执行时，受过专门训练的团队，气道管理时间不受使用的呼吸防护设备的影响。
■为了评估动力空气净化呼吸器的影响，全脸空气净化呼吸器和过滤面罩在经过专门培训的麻醉师执行困难的气道程序。
■我们所有的COVID-19插管小组成员都进行了各种困难的插管演练：无保护，戴着全脸呼吸器,过滤面罩或电动呼吸器。评估并分析了气道管理时间和佩戴者的舒适度。
■总平均（SD）插管时间在对照组之间没有显着差异，动力，全脸呼吸器和过滤面罩组：Airtraq6.1（4.4）与5.4（3.1）vs.6.1（5.6）与7.7(7.6)s;视频喉镜检查11.4(9.0)vs.7.7（4.3）vs.9.8（8.4）vs.12.7(9.8)s;纤维插管16.6(7.8)vs.13.8(6.7)vs.13.6（8.1）vs.16.9（9.2）s；直接喉镜下标准气管插管8.1（3.5）与6.5（5.6）vs.6.2(4.2)vs.8.0(4.4)s,分别。使用Airtraq实现了最短的插管时间。麻醉师对电动呼吸器组的温度和视力进行了评估。
■高级气道管理不受经过专门培训的呼吸防护设备的影响，指定团队。我们得出的结论是，当高级气道技能由指定的人执行时，受过专门训练的团队，气道管理时间不受使用的呼吸防护设备的影响。
