Video-assisted Intubations in the Prehospital Setting (VIPS)

BACKGROUND

Literature shows that the rate of first-time success of emergency endotracheal intubation by ambulance nurses is highly variable; rates between 46 and 95% have been reported. Due to differences in device design, we hypothesize that the rate of first-time success can be improved when using videolaryngoscopy instead of direct laryngoscopy.



AIM

The primary aim of this prospective, observational study is to compare the rate of first-time success of intubation (by ambulance nurses) using videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy. Secondary aims are to assess the rate of second-attempt success, time required for intubation, rate of adverse events, and rate of ROSC after videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy, performed by ambulance nurses.



STUDY DESIGN

Observational study.



POPULATION

Patients requiring emergency endotracheal intubation.



INTERVENTION

Videolaryngoscopy

CONTROL

Direct laryngoscopy

ENDPOINTS

Primary outcome measure: first-time success.

Secondary outcome measures: second-attempt success, time required for intubation, adverse events, and ROSC.

Primary and secondary outcomes will be determined on-scene immediately after intubation.

RECRUITING COUNTRIES

The Netherlands

We expect that video-assisted intubation (video laryngoscopy) by ambulance nurses will have a higher success rate than intubation with a classical intubation device (direct laryngoscopy).

On-scene, immediately after intubation

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy