| Title |
Discrimination ability of the endotracheal tube location using real-time palpation during intubation using an endotracheal tube with a preloaded stylet
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s171563 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Go Un Roh, Yun Jeong Chae, Young Bok Lee, Wikwang Wang, Chang Ik Choi, In Kyong Yi |
| Abstract |
Palpation during intubation could be used as an ancillary method of providing real-time information of the endotracheal tube (ETT) placement before manual ventilation. This study aimed to evaluate the ability to discriminate the ETT location using a modified real-time palpation method with a preloaded stylet during intubation. The examiner performing the real-time palpation method placed three fingers on the lateral sides of the trachea between the sternal notch and the thyroid cartilage to determine if endotracheal intubation was successful. Endotracheal intubation was confirmed by auscultation and quantitative carbon dioxide waveform using capnography. Eighty-eight patients were enrolled in this study. The discrimination accuracy of the real-time palpation method was 98.9% (95% CI: 93.8-99.8) for identifying the location of ETT between the trachea and esophagus. There was one false negative, reported as esophageal intubation rather than tracheal intubation. The real-time palpation method during intubation using an ETT with a preloaded stylet is an instantly applicable technique with good discrimination ability. The addition of real-time information through this palpation method to the conventional intubation process, especially in patients with poor vocal cord visualization, would be useful to facilitate the process of safe and careful endotracheal intubation. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 July 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#1,204
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#299,743
of 341,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#25
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,606 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.