Article Sidebar
Published:
Oct 11, 2023DOI:
10.4314/ahs.v23i3.67Keywords:
Article Details
While African Health Sciences has been freely accessible online there have been questions on whether it is Open Access or not. We wish to clearly state that indeed African Health Sciences is Open Access. There are key issues regarding Open Access needing clarification for avoidance of doubt:
- 1. Henceforth, papers in African Health Sciences will be published under the CC BY (Creative Commons Attribution License) 4.0 International. See details on https://creativecomons.org/)
- 2. The copyright owners or the authors grant the 3rd party (perpetually and in advance) the right to disseminate, reproduce, or use the research papers in part or in full, format/medium as long as:
- No substantive errors are introduced in the process
- Attribution of authorship and correct citation details are given
- The referencing details are not changed.
Should the papers be reproduced in part, this must be clearly stated.
- 3. The papers will be freely and universally accessible online in an easily readable format such as XML in at least one widely recognized open access repository such as PUBMED CENTRAL.
B. ABRIDGED LICENCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN AUTHORS AND African Health Sciences
I submitted my manuscript to African Health Sciences and would like to affirm that:
1.0 I am authorized by my co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
2.0 I guarantee, on behalf of self and co-authors:
- That the paper is original, and has not been published in any other peer-reviewed journal; nor is it under consideration by other journal (s). It does not infringe existing copyright or any other person’s rights
- That we are/I am the sole author(s) of the paper and with authority to enter into this agreement. My granting rights to African Health Sciences is not in breach of any other obligation
- That the paper contains nothing unlawful, or libelous. Nor anything that would constitute a breach of contract, confidence or commitment given to secrecy, if published
- That I/we have taken care to ensure the integrity of the article.
3.0 I and all co-authors, agree that the paper, if accepted for publication, shall be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0. (see https://creativecommons.org/)
Main Article Content
Using a shortened uncuffed endotracheal tube as a nasopharyngeal airway: a useful adjunct during fiberoptic intubation training among anesthesia residents
Abstract
Background: Fiberoptic intubation (FOI) is considered a beneficial modality used to intubate life-threatening airway patients.
This study aims at assessing the effectiveness of shortened uncuffed endotracheal tube as a nasopharyngeal airway during FOI.
Methods: Between January 2019 and March 2021, this prospective randomized controlled trial has enrolled 62 adult patients
(56 males and 6 females) with normal airways scheduled for elective oral FOI classified American Society of Anesthesiologists
(ASA I-III), their age ranged 20-60 years. The patients were randomized into two equal groups (31 per each); in group I, FOI
was carried using lingual traction, and in group II, FOI was carried out with lingual traction plus a shortened uncuffed endotracheal
tube as a modified nasopharyngeal airway to maintain oxygenation. The time taken to successful tracheal intubation and
other technical parameters have been measured. The heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO2),
end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2), and any associated complications have been measured.
Results: During insertion of the scope, the SpO2 was significantly decreased in group I (92.55 ± 7.94) compared to group II
(97.42 ± 6.34), p=0.009. The heart rate, MAP, and EtCO2 were found to be insignificantly different in both groups (p>0.05).
The time needed for intubation in group I (2.78±0.98 min) was prolonged compared with group II (1.95±1.02 min) p =0.002.
The number of attempts was comparable in both groups, while the number of successful intubations from the 1st attempt was
12 (39%) compared to 18 (58%) in groups I and II respectively, p=0.36. The overall success rate by juniors was 71% in group I
compared to 84% in group II, p=0.66 with a lower incidence of using rescue oxygen and other facilitating maneuvers.
Conclusions: The modified nasopharyngeal airway is a useful modality to facilitate oral FOI by anesthesia resident trainees.
Keywords: Nasopharyngeal airway; Endotracheal tube; Training of FOI.
