Comparison between C-MAC and King Vision video laryngoscope (channelled blade) for tracheal intubation in aerosol-prevention intubation box for COVID-19 patients: A manikin-based study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The risk of contracting infection while intubating a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-positive patient can be reduced by the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), video laryngoscope (VL) and aerosol-preventing intubation box. We compared two VLs (C-MAC and King Vision laryngoscope [KVL]) for ease of intubation and time taken to intubate the manikin using an intubation box. METHODS: This randomised study involved healthcare workers having experience in using both C-MAC and KVL. After explaining the study and five practice sessions, a total of 63 volunteers were included; 61 participants gave consent and were enroled. The participants were allowed to intubate initially with one VL as per random sequence. Each participant performed three tracheal intubations with each device (C-MAC VL and KVL) on a manikin using an aerosol-prevention box over the head end at the time of intubation. RESULTS: Time taken, percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score and the number of attempts taken for successful intubation with C-MAC and KVL were comparable in any of the three attempts (P > 0.05). The participants reported more difficulty in using KVL compared to C-MAC, and insertion of laryngoscope blade into the mouth of manikin for intubation was easy in group C-MAC compared to KVL in all three intubations (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: C-MAC and KVL take comparable time for successful intubation under COVID-19 simulation conditions. But C-MAC is more user-friendly.