Published Simulation Evidence
A published 2021 evaluation compared IntuBlade, GlideScope Ranger, and direct laryngoscopy in clean and soiled high-fidelity manikin conditions. The findings below are simulation results, not patient outcomes.
Decreased Time to Intubation by Experienced Users with a New Lens-Clearing Video Laryngoscope in a Simulated Setting
Andrew Napier, M.D. & Tony Zitek, M.D. • February 2021
Clean Simulated Airway
Mean time was 14.3 seconds with IntuBlade and 26.3 seconds with GlideScope Ranger (p = 0.008).
Soiled Simulated Airway
Mean time was 19.0 seconds with IntuBlade and 28.6 seconds with GlideScope Ranger (p = 0.004).
Key Findings
- 21 emergency medicine physicians participated in the non-randomized, group-controlled simulation
- Mean successful-intubation time was lower with IntuBlade than GlideScope Ranger in both clean and soiled simulated conditions
- Cormack-Lehane view differences between devices were not statistically significant
- The authors concluded that additional evaluation in clinical settings is warranted
Study Design
A non-randomized, group-controlled trial compared the performance of direct laryngoscopy (DL), GlideScope® Ranger (HVL), and IntuBlade® (IVL) in both non-soiled and soiled simulated airway conditions. Emergency medicine physicians were given standardized training and asked to intubate a high-fidelity airway manikin with each device. Mock blood was applied to simulate real-world soiled airway conditions.
"Patients undergoing emergent intubations desaturate more rapidly than healthy counterparts. This becomes even more significant in patients with severe traumatic injuries as minor changes in oxygenation are poorly tolerated."
American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2021
Clinical Intelligence Hub
Explore expert commentary, technical briefings, and implementation guides from leading airway management specialists.