Comparison of the GlideRite to the conventional malleable stylet for endotracheal intubation by the Macintosh laryngoscope: a simulation study using manikins

Abstract

Objective To compare the effectiveness of the GlideRite stylet with the conventional malleable stylet (CMS) in endotracheal intubation (ETI) by the Macintosh laryngoscope. Methods This study is a randomized, crossover, simulation study. Participants performed ETI using both the GlideRite stylet and the CMS in a normal airway model and a tongue edema model (simulated difficult airway resulting in lower percentage of glottic opening [POGO]). Results In both the normal and tongue edema models, all 36 participants successfully performed ETI with the two stylets on the first attempt. In the normal airway model, there was no difference in time required for ETI (TETI) or in ease of handling between the two stylets. In the tongue edema model, the TETI using the CMS increased as the POGO score decreased (POGO score was negatively correlated with TETI for the CMS, Spearman’s rho=-0.518, P=0.001); this difference was not seen with the GlideRite (rho=-0.208, P=0.224). The TETI was shorter with the GlideRite than with the CMS, however, this difference was not statistically significant (15.1 vs. 18.8 seconds, P=0.385). Ease of handling was superior with the GlideRite compared with the CMS (P=0.006). Conclusion Performance of the GlideRite and the CMS were not different in the normal airway model. However, in the simulated difficult airway model with a low POGO score, the GlideRite performed better than the CMS for direct laryngoscopic intubation.