Intubation face à face: Du nouveau ?
Comparison of Sitting Face-to-Face Intubation (Two-Person Technique) with Standard Oral-tracheal Intubation in Novices: A Mannequin Study
J Emerg Med. 2012 Dec;43(6):1188-95
L'intubation face au patient n'est pas une nouveauté que ce soit en préhospitalier ou au bloc opératoire. Elle est cependant très peu fréquemment mise en oeuvre. Pourtant l'apparition des vidéolaryngoscopes, notamment l'airtraq, simplifie grandement cette pratique (vidéo ici). Certains s'interrogent sur son emploi plus large. Elle serait plus aisée que la laryngoscopie directe en décubitus dorsal. C'est ce que suggère ce document. Un grand recul est cependant nécessaire. Ce travail a été fait sur mannequin.
Few studies have evaluated the impact of the upright position on the success of oral-tracheal intubation. Yet, for patients with airway difficulties (i.e, active intraoral bleeding or morbidly obese), the upright position may both benefit the patient and facilitate intubation.
We compared the success rates of subjects performing standard intubation to a modified version of the sitting face-to-face oral-tracheal intubation technique on a simulation model. We also reviewed the possible advantages and limitations of the sitting face-to-face intubationtechnique.
Volunteer medical and paramedical students were given instruction, then tested, performing in random order both standard oral-trachealand two-person sitting face-to-face oral-tracheal intubation on full-bodied mannequins. Observers reviewed video recordings, noting the number of successful intubations and the time to completion of each procedure at 15, 20, and 30 s.
All of the sitting face-to-face intubations were successful, 53/53 (100%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 93-100%); whereas of the 53 subjects who performed standard intubation, 48 were successful (91%, 95% CI 80-96%). The difference between successful intubations using thestandard vs. sitting face-to-face technique was 9% (95% CI 1.3-9.4%, p=0.025). At times 15 and 20 s, medical student subjects who successfully performed both techniques were less successful at completing the procedure when performing the standard technique as compared to the sittingface-to-face technique (p=0.016). A post-procedural survey found that the majority of subjects preferred the sitting technique.
Subjects were significantly more successful at performing and preferred the sitting face-to-face intubation when compared to standardintubation.