↓ Skip to main content

The C-MAC videolaryngoscope compared with conventional laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation at the emergency department: study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The C-MAC videolaryngoscope compared with conventional laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation at the emergency department: study protocol
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13049-015-0119-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Sulser, Dirk Ubmann, Martin Brueesch, Georg Goliasch, Burkhardt Seifert, Donat R Spahn, Kurt Ruetzler

Abstract

Especially in the emergency setting, rapid and successful airway management is of major importance. Conventional endotracheal intubation is challenging and requires high level of individual skills and experience. Videolaryngoscopes like the C-MAC are likely to offer better glottis visualization and serve as alternatives to conventional endotracheal intubation. The aim of this study is to compare clinical performance and feasibility of the C-MAC videolaryngoscope compared to conventional endotracheal intubation in the emergency setting. This study is designed as a prospective, patient-blinded, mono-center, randomized cohort study. This study will be performed at the Emergency Department of the University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. All patients transferred to the Emergency Department and requiring emergent endotracheal intubation will be screened. Successful intubation with first intubation attempt will serve as the primary outcome. Time to intubation, intubation attempts, Cormack & Lehane Score, ease of intubation, complications, necessity of using alternate intubation device, maximum drop of saturation, and potential technical problems serve as secondary outcomes. In the clinical setting, the ultimate success rate of endotracheal intubation ranges between 97% and 99%. Unexpected difficulties during laryngoscopy and poor glottis visualization occur in up to 9% of all cases. In these cases, videolaryngoscopes may increase success rate of initial intubation attempt and thereby patient safety. www.clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT02297113 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 16%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 63%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 10 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 May 2015.
All research outputs
#13,941,015
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#869
of 1,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,639
of 265,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,257 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,147 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.