↓ 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

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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 ).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 34 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 17%
Other 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 10 28%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 72%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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
#3,259,457
of 7,895,896 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#288
of 583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,904
of 205,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#12
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,895,896 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 58th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 583 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 205,514 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.