Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Yahaya,Nurul Haizam
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Teo,Rufinah, Izaham,Azarinah, Tang,Shereen, Yusof,Aliza Mohamad, Manap,Norsidah Abdul
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000300283
Resumo: ABSTRACT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of anaesthetic trainee doctors compared to nursing anaesthetic assistants in identifying the cricoid cartilage, applying the appropriate cricoid pressure and producing an adequate laryngeal inlet view. METHODS: Eighty-five participants, 42 anaesthetic trainee doctors and 43 nursing anaesthetic assistants, were asked to complete a set of questionnaires which included the correct amount of force to be applied to the cricoid cartilage. They were then asked to identify the cricoid cartilage and apply the cricoid pressure on an upper airway manikin placed on a weighing scale, and the pressure was recorded. Subsequently they applied cricoid pressure on actual anaesthetized patients following rapid sequence induction. Details regarding the cricoid pressure application and the Cormack-Lehane classification of the laryngeal view were recorded. RESULTS: The anaesthetic trainee doctors were significantly better than the nursing anaesthetic assistants in identifying the cricoid cartilage (95.2% vs. 55.8%, p = 0.001). However, both groups were equally poor in the knowledge about the amount of cricoid pressure force required (11.9% vs. 9.3% respectively) and in the correct application of cricoid pressure (16.7% vs. 20.9% respectively). The three-finger technique was performed by 85.7% of the anaesthetic trainee doctors and 65.1% of the nursing anaesthetic assistants (p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in the Cormack-Lehane view between both groups. CONCLUSION: The anaesthetic trainee doctors were better than the nursing anaesthetic assistants in cricoid cartilage identification but both groups were equally poor in their knowledge and application of cricoid pressure.
id SBA-1_5171bc5549caea324a4f246f309e38c6
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0034-70942016000300283
network_acronym_str SBA-1
network_name_str Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistantsCricoid pressureTrainee anaesthetistsAnaesthetic assistantsABSTRACT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of anaesthetic trainee doctors compared to nursing anaesthetic assistants in identifying the cricoid cartilage, applying the appropriate cricoid pressure and producing an adequate laryngeal inlet view. METHODS: Eighty-five participants, 42 anaesthetic trainee doctors and 43 nursing anaesthetic assistants, were asked to complete a set of questionnaires which included the correct amount of force to be applied to the cricoid cartilage. They were then asked to identify the cricoid cartilage and apply the cricoid pressure on an upper airway manikin placed on a weighing scale, and the pressure was recorded. Subsequently they applied cricoid pressure on actual anaesthetized patients following rapid sequence induction. Details regarding the cricoid pressure application and the Cormack-Lehane classification of the laryngeal view were recorded. RESULTS: The anaesthetic trainee doctors were significantly better than the nursing anaesthetic assistants in identifying the cricoid cartilage (95.2% vs. 55.8%, p = 0.001). However, both groups were equally poor in the knowledge about the amount of cricoid pressure force required (11.9% vs. 9.3% respectively) and in the correct application of cricoid pressure (16.7% vs. 20.9% respectively). The three-finger technique was performed by 85.7% of the anaesthetic trainee doctors and 65.1% of the nursing anaesthetic assistants (p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in the Cormack-Lehane view between both groups. CONCLUSION: The anaesthetic trainee doctors were better than the nursing anaesthetic assistants in cricoid cartilage identification but both groups were equally poor in their knowledge and application of cricoid pressure.Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia2016-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000300283Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia v.66 n.3 2016reponame:Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA)instacron:SBA10.1016/j.bjane.2014.10.008info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessYahaya,Nurul HaizamTeo,RufinahIzaham,AzarinahTang,ShereenYusof,Aliza MohamadManap,Norsidah Abduleng2016-05-30T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0034-70942016000300283Revistahttps://www.sbahq.org/revista/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||sba2000@openlink.com.br1806-907X0034-7094opendoar:2016-05-30T00:00Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
title Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
spellingShingle Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
Yahaya,Nurul Haizam
Cricoid pressure
Trainee anaesthetists
Anaesthetic assistants
title_short Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
title_full Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
title_fullStr Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
title_sort Analysis of cricoid pressure application: anaesthetic trainee doctors vs. nursing anaesthetic assistants
author Yahaya,Nurul Haizam
author_facet Yahaya,Nurul Haizam
Teo,Rufinah
Izaham,Azarinah
Tang,Shereen
Yusof,Aliza Mohamad
Manap,Norsidah Abdul
author_role author
author2 Teo,Rufinah
Izaham,Azarinah
Tang,Shereen
Yusof,Aliza Mohamad
Manap,Norsidah Abdul
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Yahaya,Nurul Haizam
Teo,Rufinah
Izaham,Azarinah
Tang,Shereen
Yusof,Aliza Mohamad
Manap,Norsidah Abdul
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Cricoid pressure
Trainee anaesthetists
Anaesthetic assistants
topic Cricoid pressure
Trainee anaesthetists
Anaesthetic assistants
description ABSTRACT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of anaesthetic trainee doctors compared to nursing anaesthetic assistants in identifying the cricoid cartilage, applying the appropriate cricoid pressure and producing an adequate laryngeal inlet view. METHODS: Eighty-five participants, 42 anaesthetic trainee doctors and 43 nursing anaesthetic assistants, were asked to complete a set of questionnaires which included the correct amount of force to be applied to the cricoid cartilage. They were then asked to identify the cricoid cartilage and apply the cricoid pressure on an upper airway manikin placed on a weighing scale, and the pressure was recorded. Subsequently they applied cricoid pressure on actual anaesthetized patients following rapid sequence induction. Details regarding the cricoid pressure application and the Cormack-Lehane classification of the laryngeal view were recorded. RESULTS: The anaesthetic trainee doctors were significantly better than the nursing anaesthetic assistants in identifying the cricoid cartilage (95.2% vs. 55.8%, p = 0.001). However, both groups were equally poor in the knowledge about the amount of cricoid pressure force required (11.9% vs. 9.3% respectively) and in the correct application of cricoid pressure (16.7% vs. 20.9% respectively). The three-finger technique was performed by 85.7% of the anaesthetic trainee doctors and 65.1% of the nursing anaesthetic assistants (p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in the Cormack-Lehane view between both groups. CONCLUSION: The anaesthetic trainee doctors were better than the nursing anaesthetic assistants in cricoid cartilage identification but both groups were equally poor in their knowledge and application of cricoid pressure.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000300283
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000300283
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1016/j.bjane.2014.10.008
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia v.66 n.3 2016
reponame:Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA)
instacron:SBA
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA)
instacron_str SBA
institution SBA
reponame_str Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online)
collection Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||sba2000@openlink.com.br
_version_ 1752126628694065152