PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the effect of head rotation on the first-attempt success rate of i-gel insertion, aiming to alleviate the effect of gravity on the tongue and reduce resistance between the device and the tongue.
METHODS: Adult surgical patients were randomized to standard and head rotation technique groups. In the head rotation technique group, patients\' heads were maximally rotated to the left before i-gel insertion. The primary endpoint was the first-attempt success rate. Secondary endpoints included the success rate within two attempts (using the allocated technique), time required for successful i-gel placement within two attempts, and success rate at the third attempt (using the opposite technique).
RESULTS: Among 158 patients, the head rotation technique group showed a significantly higher first-attempt success rate (60/80, 75.0%) compared to the standard technique group (45/78, 57.7%; P = 0.021). The success rate within two attempts was similar between the groups (95.0% vs. 91.0%, P = 0.326). The time required for successful i-gel placement was significantly shorter in the head rotation technique (mean [SD], 13.4 [3.7] s vs. 16.3 [7.8] s; P = 0.030). When the head rotation technique failed, the standard technique also failed in all cases (n = 4), whereas the head rotation technique succeeded in five out of the seven patients where the standard technique failed.
CONCLUSIONS: The head rotation technique significantly improved the first-attempt success rate and reduced the time required for successful i-gel insertion. It was effective when the standard technique failed. The head rotation technique may be an effective primary or alternative method for i-gel insertion.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05201339).
METHODS: Adult surgical patients were randomized to standard and head rotation technique groups. In the head rotation technique group, patients\' heads were maximally rotated to the left before i-gel insertion. The primary endpoint was the first-attempt success rate. Secondary endpoints included the success rate within two attempts (using the allocated technique), time required for successful i-gel placement within two attempts, and success rate at the third attempt (using the opposite technique).
RESULTS: Among 158 patients, the head rotation technique group showed a significantly higher first-attempt success rate (60/80, 75.0%) compared to the standard technique group (45/78, 57.7%; P = 0.021). The success rate within two attempts was similar between the groups (95.0% vs. 91.0%, P = 0.326). The time required for successful i-gel placement was significantly shorter in the head rotation technique (mean [SD], 13.4 [3.7] s vs. 16.3 [7.8] s; P = 0.030). When the head rotation technique failed, the standard technique also failed in all cases (n = 4), whereas the head rotation technique succeeded in five out of the seven patients where the standard technique failed.
CONCLUSIONS: The head rotation technique significantly improved the first-attempt success rate and reduced the time required for successful i-gel insertion. It was effective when the standard technique failed. The head rotation technique may be an effective primary or alternative method for i-gel insertion.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05201339).
摘要：
背景：这项研究评估了头部旋转对i-gel插入的首次尝试成功率的影响，旨在减轻重力对舌头的影响，并减少设备和舌头之间的阻力。
方法：将成人手术患者随机分为标准组和头部旋转技术组。在头部旋转技术组中，在插入i-gel之前，患者的头部最大限度地向左旋转。主要终点是首次尝试成功率。次要终点包括两次尝试中的成功率（使用分配的技术），在两次尝试内成功放置i-gel所需的时间，以及第三次尝试的成功率（使用相反的技术）。
结果：在158名患者中，头部旋转技术组的首次尝试成功率(60/80,75.0%)明显高于标准技术组(45/78,57.7%;P=0.021).两组之间的两次尝试成功率相似（95.0％vs.91.0%,P=0.326）。在头部旋转技术中，成功放置i-gel所需的时间明显较短(平均值[SD]，13.4[3.7]svs.16.3[7.8]s;P=0.030)。当磁头旋转技术失败时，标准技术在所有情况下也失败了(n=4)，而头部旋转技术在标准技术失败的7名患者中有5名成功。
结论：头部旋转技术显着提高了首次尝试的成功率，并减少了成功插入i-gel所需的时间。当标准技术失败时，这是有效的。头部旋转技术可以是用于i-gel插入的有效的主要或替代方法。
背景：ClinicalTrials.gov（NCT05201339）。
方法：将成人手术患者随机分为标准组和头部旋转技术组。在头部旋转技术组中，在插入i-gel之前，患者的头部最大限度地向左旋转。主要终点是首次尝试成功率。次要终点包括两次尝试中的成功率（使用分配的技术），在两次尝试内成功放置i-gel所需的时间，以及第三次尝试的成功率（使用相反的技术）。
结果：在158名患者中，头部旋转技术组的首次尝试成功率(60/80,75.0%)明显高于标准技术组(45/78,57.7%;P=0.021).两组之间的两次尝试成功率相似（95.0％vs.91.0%,P=0.326）。在头部旋转技术中，成功放置i-gel所需的时间明显较短(平均值[SD]，13.4[3.7]svs.16.3[7.8]s;P=0.030)。当磁头旋转技术失败时，标准技术在所有情况下也失败了(n=4)，而头部旋转技术在标准技术失败的7名患者中有5名成功。
结论：头部旋转技术显着提高了首次尝试的成功率，并减少了成功插入i-gel所需的时间。当标准技术失败时，这是有效的。头部旋转技术可以是用于i-gel插入的有效的主要或替代方法。
背景：ClinicalTrials.gov（NCT05201339）。
