Article Sidebar
Published:
Aug 29, 2013Article Details
Copyright remains in the Author’s name. The work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - Noncommercial Works License. Authors are required to complete and sign an Author Agreement form that outlines Author and Publisher rights and terms of publication. The Agreement form should be uploaded along with other submissions files and any submission will be considered incomplete without it [forthcoming].
Material submitted for publication in the SAMJ is accepted provided it has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. Please inform the editorial team if the main findings of your paper have been presented at a conference and published in abstract form, to avoid copyright infringement. The SAMJ does not hold itself responsible for statements made by the authors.
Previously published images
If an image/figure has been previously published, permission to reproduce or alter it must be obtained by the authors from the original publisher and the figure legend must give full credit to the original source. This credit should be accompanied by a letter indicating that permission to reproduce the image has been granted to the author/s. This letter should be uploaded as a supplementary file during submission.
Main Article Content
Endotracheal tube cuff pressures – the worrying reality: A comparative audit of intra-operative versus emergency intubations
Abstract
Method. Endotracheal tube cuff pressures of 91 patients in the trauma centre and 100 patients in the theatre complex were randomly measured using a Mallinckrodt cuff pressure gauge. The measurements were recorded on a standardised data sheet and transferred to an electronic database for analysis.
Results. There was a significant difference between cuff pressures in the trauma centre and those in the theatre complex (p<0.001), the means being 55 cmH2O and 25 cmH2O, respectively. The site of intubation had a significant (p=0.001) effect on cuff pressures, with mean pressures as follows: on scene – 71 cmH2O; referral hospital – 57 cmH2O; and Groote Schuur trauma centre – 42 cmH2O. Only 30% of cuff pressures measured in the trauma centre were below 30 cmH2O, and, alarmingly, 17% were between 91 and 120 cmH2O. In the theatre complex, 77% of cuff pressures were in the acceptable range. Digital balloon palpation corresponded poorly (correlation coefficient 0.47) with measured cuff pressure, and statistical analysis showed that it tended to underestimate the pressure at higher cuff pressures.
Conclusion. The risk of a high cuff pressure is roughly two- to threefold higher in emergency patients than in theatre patients. These unacceptably high cuff pressures are especially concerning in view of the fact that many trauma patients are hypotensive and therefore more susceptible to mucosal ischaemia.
