Vol. 20 No. 2(75) (2021), Artykuły
Vol. 20 No. 2(75) (2021)

Effectiveness of selected alternative methods of airway management by the nursing staff

Artykuły
Published 2021-05-26
Ewelina Iwanicka
Student Scientific Club of Emergency Medicine, College of Medical Sciences, University of Rzeszów
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4722-8710
Paweł Więch
Institute of Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Rzeszów
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0101-1030
Izabela Sałacińska
Institute of Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Rzeszów
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1752-7610
Joanna Przybek-Mita
Institute of Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Rzeszów
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8403-5889

Abstract

EFFECTIVENESS OF SELECTED ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF AIRWAY MANAGEMENT BY THE NURSING STAFF

Aim. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of selected methods of alternative airway management by nursing staff.

Material and methods. A prospective, pilot observational study was conducted on a group of 51 nurses undergoing specialization training or with specialty. Each nurse managed the airway with a laryngeal mask (LMA-Laryngeal Mask) and a laryngeal tube (LT-D-Laryngeal Tube) on a BT-CSIE trainer, and then carried out one minute ventilation using a bag valve mask, according to possessed knowledge and skills. The obtained parameters (time, pressure on the incisors, head tilt, ventilation quality) were recorded using a dedicated tablet. Statistical analysis was performed using the IBMSPSS Statistics 20 package.

Results. No statistically significant differences were observed between the trials to open the airway using LMA and LT-D. Higher efficiency of LMA airway opening was demonstrated in the first trial and the average tidal volume during ventilation in relation to LT-D (LMA 547.84ml vs. LT-D 522.63ml). In addition, there was a significant difference in pressure on the incisors (LMA 6.82N vs. LT-D 4.12N).

Conclusions. The effectiveness of LMA and LT-D insertion was assessed at a high level, with no significant differences between them. Variables: age, seniority, education level and type of specialization did not significantly differentiate the results obtained.

Eff ectiveness of selected alternative methods of airway management by the nursing staff.pdf

References

1. Josephson ME. Sudden cardiac arrest. Indian. Heart. J. 2014; 66(Suppl 1): 2-3.

2. Perkins GD, Travers AH, Berg RA, et al. Basic life support chapter collaborators. Part 3: Adult basic life support and automated external defibrillation: 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science. Circulation. 2015; 132(16 Suppl 1): 51-83.

3. Gordon J, Cooper RM, Parotto M. Supraglottic airway devices: indications, contraindications and management. Minerva Anestesiol. 2018; 84(3): 389-397.

4. McNarry AF, Patel A. The evolution of airway management- new concepts and conflicts with traditional practice. Br. J. Anaesth. 2017; 119(1): 154-166.

5. Newel C, Greir S, Soar J. Airway and ventilation management during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and after successful resuscitation. Available online: https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-018-2121-y (accessed on 22 March 2020).

6. Soar J, Nolan JP, Böttiger BW, et. al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015 Section 3. Adult advanced life support. Resuscitation. 2015; 95: 100-147.

7. Wahlen BM, Roewer N, Lange M, et al. Tracheal intubation and alternative airway management devices used by healthcare professionals with different level of pre-existing skills: a manikin study. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64(5): 549-554.

8. The Regulation of The Minister of Health of February 28, 2017 concerning the type and scope of preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic and rehabilitation services provided by a nurse or midwife independently without a medical order. Dz.U. 2017 poz. 497. (in Polish). Available online: http://prawo.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20170000497 (accessed on 28 March 2020).

9. Act of July 15, 2011 on the professions of nurse and midwife. Dz.U. 2011 nr 174 poz. 1039. (in Polish). Available online: http://prawo.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20111741039 (accessed on 28 March 2020).

10. Act of September 8, on the State Emergency Medical Service. Dz.U. 2006 nr 191 poz. 1410. (in Polish). Available online: http://prawo.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20061911410 (accessed on 30 March 2020).

11. Van Zundert TC, Brimacombe JR. Similar oropharyngeal leak pressures during anaesthesia with I-gel, LMA-ProSeal and LMA-Supreme Laryngeal Masks. Acta. Anaesthesiol. Belg. 2012; 63(1): 35-41.

12. Ocker H, Wenzel V, Schmucker P, et al. A comparison of the laryngeal tube with the laryngeal mask airway during routine surgical procedures. Anesth. Analg. 2002; 95(4): 1094-1097.

13. Polish Resuscitation Council. Resuscitation guidelines. 2015. (in Polish). Available online: https://www.prc.krakow.pl/wytyczne.html (accessed on 2 April 2020).

14. Brimacombe JR. Laryngeal Mask Anesthesia. Principles and Practice. Saunders Elsevier Ltd. London 2004.

15. Metterlein T, Plank C, Sinner B, et al. A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube. SJA. 2015; 9(1): 37-41.

16. Kette F, Reffo I, Giordani G, et al. The use of laryngeal tube by nurses in out-of-hospital emergencies: preliminary experience. Resuscitation. 2005; 66(1): 21-25.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2021 Authors