Single-use versus reusable metallic laryngoscopes for non-emergent intubation: A retrospective review of 72,672 intubations

Daniel R. Chang, Garrett W. Burnett, Sophia Chiu, Yuxia Ouyang, Hung Mo Lin, Jaime B. Hyman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Study objective: Increased regulatory requirements for sterilization in recent years have prompted a widespread transition from reusable to single-use laryngoscopes. The purpose of this study was to determine if the transition from metallic reusable to metallic single-use laryngoscopes impacted the performance of direct laryngoscopy at an academic medical center. Design: Single-site retrospective cohort study. Setting: General anesthetic cases requiring tracheal intubation. Patients: Adult patients undergoing non-emergent procedures. Interventions: Data were collected two years before and two years after a transition from metallic reusable to metallic single-use laryngoscopes. Measurements: The primary outcome was need for intubation rescue with an alternate device. Secondary outcomes were difficult laryngeal view (modified Cormack-Lehane grade ≥ 2b) and hypoxemia (SpO2 < 90% for >30 s) during direct laryngoscopy intubations. Subgroup analyses for rapid sequence induction, Macintosh blades, Miller blades, and patients with difficult airway risk factors (Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Mallampati ≥3, Body Mass Index >30 kg/m2) were performed. Main results: In total, 72,672 patients were included: 35,549 (48.9%) in the reusable laryngoscope cohort and 37,123 (51.1%) in the single-use laryngoscope cohort. Compared with reusable laryngoscopes, single-use laryngoscopes were associated with fewer rescue intubations with an alternate device (covariates-adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.81 95% CI 0.66–0.99). Single-use laryngoscopes were also associated with lower odds of difficult laryngeal view (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80–0.93). Single use laryngoscopes were not associated with hypoxemia during the intubation attempt (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.88–1.20). Similar results were observed for subgroup analyses including rapid sequence induction, Macintosh blades, Miller blades, and patients with difficult airway risk factors. Conclusions: Metallic single-use laryngoscopes were associated with less need for rescue intubation with alternate devices and lower incidence of poor laryngeal view compared to reusable metallic laryngoscopes.

Original languageEnglish
Article number111187
JournalJournal of Clinical Anesthesia
Volume89
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2023

Keywords

  • Airway management
  • Direct laryngoscopy
  • Intubation
  • Laryngoscope

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Single-use versus reusable metallic laryngoscopes for non-emergent intubation: A retrospective review of 72,672 intubations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this