4 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
There are two routes in which a fiberoptic intubation can be performed - oral and nasal. In general, nasal intubation by any conventional method may be the preferred choice for certain procedures such as intra-oral surgeries, or for anatomical reasons such as limited mouth opening. If nasal intubation is not indicated or preferred, then oral intubation is usually performed. This study is looking to explore whether or not the nasal route significantly improves the ease and time for successful fiberoptic intubation compared to the oral route in children less than or equal to 2 years of age. This study will also examine if operator experience influence time to tracheal intubation with either route? The investigators hypothesize that the nasal route of fiberoptic intubation will be faster than the oral route, for both the trainee and the expert, and that there will be minimal differences between experts and trainees with nasal fiberoptic intubation.
The goal of this prospective randomized study is to compare the effect of operator experience on the ability to use fiberoptic-guided intubation in children less than two years old, with and without the use of an air-Q as a conduit. The question the investigators are trying to answer is: Does the operator experience make a significant difference in the time for successful fiberoptic guided tracheal intubation with and without the use of an air-Q intubating laryngeal airway?
The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a difference in time for successful fiberoptic guided tracheal intubation through the i-gel or air-Q supraglottic airway.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is a clinically relevant difference in time to tracheal intubation when using fiberoptic bronchoscope as a guide to intubate through the Ambu Aura-i or air-Q ILA.