Video Laryngoscopy vs. Direct Laryngoscopy in Teaching Neonatal Endotracheal Intubation: A Simulation-Based Study.

Background: Neonatal endotracheal intubation is a life-saving procedural skill where best practices have been developed from expert opinion. Few empirical studies have examined how this skill should be taught.

Objective: To determine whether a video laryngoscope (VL) assisted intubation training curriculum compared to a traditional direct laryngoscope (DL) assisted curriculum improves neonatal intubation performance of novice intubators in a simulated setting.

Methods: A randomized trial of novice intubators was conducted at the University of Texas-Houston from 6/2013-8/2013. Eligible candidates were randomly assigned to control group (DL curriculum) or intervention group (VL curriculum). Those in the intervention group received instruction with VL videos and practice with Storz C-MAC® VL (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) in addition to a traditional curriculum. Intubation performance was evaluated in a simulated setting using a SimNewB® (Laerdal, NY, USA) manikin and traditional intubation equipment. The number of intubation attempts, outcome of each attempt, and time to successful intubation were recorded. The data was analyzed using Fisher's exact test and logistic regression where appropriate.

Results: One hundred twenty-three trainees were enrolled, 62 (50%) in DL group and 61 (50%) in the VL group. Intubation success on first attempt was achieved by 69% (43/62) of the DL group vs. 61% (37/61) of the VL group, P=0.35. Time to successful intubation was 25 sec (interquartile range (IQR) 18, 32) in the DL group and 26.5 sec (IQR 20, 43) in the VL group, P=0.27. Those in the VL group were more likely to need more than two attempts to achieve intubation success, OR=3.09 (95% CI 1.03-9.28).

Conclusions: In a simulated setting, teaching with a VL curriculum did not improve intubation performance compared to teaching with DL. Further studies are needed to determine if VL-based teaching has an impact on clinical intubation performance.