Endotracheal IntubationNCT02741921
Conventional Double-lumen Tube vs VivaSight DL
A study testing VivaSight DL and conventional double-lumen tube in people with Endotracheal Intubation, run by Medical University of Warsaw at 1 site in Poland.
Trial summary
The investigators sought to compare the time to intubation and success rate of the endotracheal intubation using standard double-lumen tube and video tube ETView DL in an adult cadaver model in normal and difficult airway conditions. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Endotracheal Intubation
- What is being tested?
- VivaSight DL and conventional double-lumen tube
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 27 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePoland
- Study dates
- Nov 2015to Mar 2016
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- fresh adult cadavers
Who cannot join
- cadavers with face injures
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Poland1 site
Medical University of Warsaw, Department of Emergency Medicine
Warsaw, Masovia, 02-005
About this study
Official title: Ability of Anesthesiologist to Placid a Double-lumen Tube. A Randomized Crossover Cadaver Study Comparing VivaSight DL and Conventional Double-lumen Tube
The investigators sought to compare the time to intubation and success rate of the endotracheal intubation using standard double-lumen tube and video tube ETView DL in an adult cadaver model in normal and difficult airway conditions.
- Conditions
- Endotracheal Intubation
- Being tested
- VivaSight DL, conventional double-lumen tube
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
VivaSight DLDevice
intubation using VivaSight DL tube
conventional double-lumen tubeDevice
intubation using conventional double-lumen tube
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Normal airway | Experimental | intubation with normal airway Cormack-Lehane classivication I Receives: Device: VivaSight DL; Device: conventional double-lumen tube |
| difficult airway | Experimental | intubation with difficult airway Cormack-Lehane classivication III Receives: Device: VivaSight DL; Device: conventional double-lumen tube |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time required for endotracheal intubation
time from pick up the tube to first ventilation
Measured: 1 day
Secondary outcomes (3)
Time required for visual confirmation of double lumen tube position position
Time required for visual confirmation of double lumen tube position position
Measured: 1 day
success rate of intubation attempt
success rate of first intubation attempt
Measured: 1 day
Ease of intubation
To access subjective opinion about the difficulty of each intubation method, participants were asked to rate it on a visual analog scale (VAS) with a score from 1 (extremely easy) to 10 (extremely difficult).
Measured: 1 day
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Apr 2016 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2015
- Primary completionMar 2016
- Study completionMar 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Endotracheal IntubationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Medical University of WarsawThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 27 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of Warsaw
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Łukasz Szarpak, Medical University of Warsaw
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02741921
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 02/04/2016
- Status last verified
- Apr 2016
- First submitted
- 13 Apr 2016
- Last updated
- 18 Apr 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Kurowski A, Szarpak L, Truszewski Z, Czyzewski L. Can the ETView VivaSight SL Rival Conventional Intubation Using the Macintosh Laryngoscope During Adult Resuscitation by Novice Physicians?: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 May;94(21):e850. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000850.
PubMed 26020389Szarpak L, Kurowski A, Zasko P, Karczewska K, Czyzewski L, Bogdanski L, Adamczyk P, Truszewski Z. Double-lumen tube tracheal intubation in a manikin model using the VivaSight Double Lumen: a randomized controlled comparison with the Macintosh laryngoscope. Am J Emerg Med. 2016 Jan;34(1):103-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.10.018. Epub 2015 Oct 23. No abstract available.
PubMed 26527175
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Apr 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Ability of Anesthesiologist to Placid a Double-lumen Tube. A Randomized Crossover Cadaver Study Comparing VivaSight DL and Conventional Double-lumen Tube
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02741921
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 02/04/2016
- Conditions
- Endotracheal Intubation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 27 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of WarsawUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Nov 2015
- Primary completion
- Mar 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Apr 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The investigators sought to compare the time to intubation and success rate of the endotracheal intubation using standard double-lumen tube and video tube ETView DL in an adult cadaver model in normal and difficult airway conditions.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Normal airway | Experimental | Device: VivaSight DL, Device: conventional double-lumen tubeintubation with normal airway Cormack-Lehane classivication I |
| difficult airway | Experimental | Device: VivaSight DL, Device: conventional double-lumen tubeintubation with difficult airway Cormack-Lehane classivication III |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- fresh adult cadavers
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- cadavers with face injures
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| VivaSight DLintubation using VivaSight DL tube | Device | Normal airway, difficult airway |
| conventional double-lumen tubeintubation using conventional double-lumen tube | Device | Normal airway, difficult airway |
Primary outcome
Time required for endotracheal intubation
Time frame: 1 day
time from pick up the tube to first ventilation
3 secondary outcomes
Time required for visual confirmation of double lumen tube position position
Time frame: 1 day
success rate of intubation attempt
Time frame: 1 day
Ease of intubation
Time frame: 1 day
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Apr 2016.
- Background: PubMed 26020389Kurowski A, Szarpak L, Truszewski Z, Czyzewski L. Can the ETView VivaSight SL Rival Conventional Intubation Using the Macintosh Laryngoscope During Adult Resuscitation by Novice Physicians?: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 May;94(21):e850. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000850.
- Background: PubMed 26527175Szarpak L, Kurowski A, Zasko P, Karczewska K, Czyzewski L, Bogdanski L, Adamczyk P, Truszewski Z. Double-lumen tube tracheal intubation in a manikin model using the VivaSight Double Lumen: a randomized controlled comparison with the Macintosh laryngoscope. Am J Emerg Med. 2016 Jan;34(1):103-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.10.018. Epub 2015 Oct 23. No abstract available.
Related trials for Endotracheal Intubation
Recruiting
Effect of a Brief Educational Intervention on Endotracheal Tube Cuff Pressure
Intubation, Endotracheal Tube Cuff Pressure
Recruiting
Hyperangulated vs Standard Videolaryngoscopy vs Direct Laryngoscopy for Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Intubation
Endobronchial Intubation, Double Lumen Tube Intubation
Recruiting
Hyperangulated vs. Macintosh Style Blades for Intubation in Obstetric Patients
Obstetric, Cesarean Birth
Not yet recruiting
AI Smart Glasses Feedback for Intubation Training in Medical Students
Intubation, Intratracheal, Medical Education
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Patient State Index at Laryngoscopy and Tracheal Intubation Conditions
Anesthesia, Intubation, Endotracheal
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing VivaSight DL and conventional double-lumen tube in people with Endotracheal Intubation, run by Medical University of Warsaw at 1 site in Poland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Apr 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Poland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time required for endotracheal intubation (time frame: 1 day). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02741921, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Apr 2016.