Video laryngoscopy, regardless of blade shape, still requires a backup plan

Annals of Emergency Medicine

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 421-422

  Levitan, Richard M ^a  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

OXYGEN;

CAMERA; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; EMERGENCY CARE; EMERGENCY MEDICINE; ILLUMINATION; INTUBATION; LARYNGOSCOPE; LARYNGOSCOPY; NOTE; OXYGEN SATURATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPIRATION CONTROL; TRACHEOTOMY; VIDEOLARYNGOSCOPY; VIDEORECORDING;

EID: 84876558570     PISSN: 01960644     EISSN: 10976760     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.01.015     Document Type: Editorial

References (5)

1. Levitan RM, Hagberg C. Upper airway retraction, new and old laryngoscope blades. In: Hagberg CA, ed. Benumof and Hagberg's Airway Management. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2013.
2. Mosier J, Chiu S, Patanwala AE, et al. A comparison of the Glidescope video laryngoscope to the C-MAC video laryngoscope for intubation in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2013;61:414-420.
3. Weingart SD, Levitan RM. Preoxygenation and prevention of desaturation during emergency airway management. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;59:165-175.
4. Emergency Medicine: Reviews and Perspectives. Airway management! Time for a change? Available at: http://www.emrap.org/episode/2012/september/airway? link-episodeguide. Accessed February 13, 2013.
5. Levitan RM, Heitz JW, Sweeney M, et al. The complexities of tracheal intubation with direct laryngoscopy and alternative intubation devices. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;57:240-247.