Cargando…

Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study

PURPOSE: Airway evaluation is a fundamental component of the preanesthetic examination. Virtual care has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to assess the reliability of a virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared with a traditional in-person airway evaluation. METHODS: This pros...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhao, Mars Y., Macaskill, James, McKay, William, Hedlin, Peter, Barbour-Tuck, Erin, Walker, Mary E., Gamble, Jonathan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663174/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36376750
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12630-022-02345-7
_version_ 1784830813965123584
author Zhao, Mars Y.
Macaskill, James
McKay, William
Hedlin, Peter
Barbour-Tuck, Erin
Walker, Mary E.
Gamble, Jonathan
author_facet Zhao, Mars Y.
Macaskill, James
McKay, William
Hedlin, Peter
Barbour-Tuck, Erin
Walker, Mary E.
Gamble, Jonathan
author_sort Zhao, Mars Y.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Airway evaluation is a fundamental component of the preanesthetic examination. Virtual care has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to assess the reliability of a virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared with a traditional in-person airway evaluation. METHODS: This prospective observational study compared the inter-rater agreement of an in-person airway evaluation performed by a consultant anesthesiologist with a virtual airway evaluation (VAE) performed by consultant anesthesiologists and medical students. The airway evaluation was completed using a comprehensive airway evaluation and scoring tool. The primary outcome was the inter-rater agreement of total scores between in-person anesthesiologist airway evaluations and the VAEs of both the anesthesiologists and medical students, assessed using Cohen’s Kappa (CK). Secondary outcomes included the inter-rater agreement for each airway evaluation component between the in-person anesthesiologists and both the anesthesiologist and medical student VAEs, assessed using prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted Kappa. RESULTS: One hundred out of 111 participants completed all three evaluations. The in-person anesthesiologist airway evaluations had fair and good levels of agreement of total scores with the VAEs of the anesthesiologists (CK, 0.21; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.34) and the medical students (CK, 0.74; 97.5% CI, 0.62 to 0.86), respectively. One participant was reported to have a difficult intubation. CONCLUSION: Virtual airway evaluations performed by anesthesiologists and medical students had fair and good inter-rater agreement, respectively, with in-person anesthesiologist airway evaluations. Further study with a focus on patients with difficult airways is required to define the predictive value of VAEs regarding difficult intubations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12630-022-02345-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9663174
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96631742022-11-14 Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study Zhao, Mars Y. Macaskill, James McKay, William Hedlin, Peter Barbour-Tuck, Erin Walker, Mary E. Gamble, Jonathan Can J Anaesth Reports of Original Investigations PURPOSE: Airway evaluation is a fundamental component of the preanesthetic examination. Virtual care has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to assess the reliability of a virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared with a traditional in-person airway evaluation. METHODS: This prospective observational study compared the inter-rater agreement of an in-person airway evaluation performed by a consultant anesthesiologist with a virtual airway evaluation (VAE) performed by consultant anesthesiologists and medical students. The airway evaluation was completed using a comprehensive airway evaluation and scoring tool. The primary outcome was the inter-rater agreement of total scores between in-person anesthesiologist airway evaluations and the VAEs of both the anesthesiologists and medical students, assessed using Cohen’s Kappa (CK). Secondary outcomes included the inter-rater agreement for each airway evaluation component between the in-person anesthesiologists and both the anesthesiologist and medical student VAEs, assessed using prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted Kappa. RESULTS: One hundred out of 111 participants completed all three evaluations. The in-person anesthesiologist airway evaluations had fair and good levels of agreement of total scores with the VAEs of the anesthesiologists (CK, 0.21; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.34) and the medical students (CK, 0.74; 97.5% CI, 0.62 to 0.86), respectively. One participant was reported to have a difficult intubation. CONCLUSION: Virtual airway evaluations performed by anesthesiologists and medical students had fair and good inter-rater agreement, respectively, with in-person anesthesiologist airway evaluations. Further study with a focus on patients with difficult airways is required to define the predictive value of VAEs regarding difficult intubations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12630-022-02345-7. Springer International Publishing 2022-11-14 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9663174/ /pubmed/36376750 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12630-022-02345-7 Text en © Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Reports of Original Investigations
Zhao, Mars Y.
Macaskill, James
McKay, William
Hedlin, Peter
Barbour-Tuck, Erin
Walker, Mary E.
Gamble, Jonathan
Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study
title Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study
title_full Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study
title_fullStr Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study
title_short Assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study
title_sort assessment of the reliability of virtual preanesthetic airway evaluation compared to traditional in-person airway evaluation: a prospective observational study
topic Reports of Original Investigations
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663174/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36376750
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12630-022-02345-7
work_keys_str_mv AT zhaomarsy assessmentofthereliabilityofvirtualpreanestheticairwayevaluationcomparedtotraditionalinpersonairwayevaluationaprospectiveobservationalstudy
AT macaskilljames assessmentofthereliabilityofvirtualpreanestheticairwayevaluationcomparedtotraditionalinpersonairwayevaluationaprospectiveobservationalstudy
AT mckaywilliam assessmentofthereliabilityofvirtualpreanestheticairwayevaluationcomparedtotraditionalinpersonairwayevaluationaprospectiveobservationalstudy
AT hedlinpeter assessmentofthereliabilityofvirtualpreanestheticairwayevaluationcomparedtotraditionalinpersonairwayevaluationaprospectiveobservationalstudy
AT barbourtuckerin assessmentofthereliabilityofvirtualpreanestheticairwayevaluationcomparedtotraditionalinpersonairwayevaluationaprospectiveobservationalstudy
AT walkermarye assessmentofthereliabilityofvirtualpreanestheticairwayevaluationcomparedtotraditionalinpersonairwayevaluationaprospectiveobservationalstudy
AT gamblejonathan assessmentofthereliabilityofvirtualpreanestheticairwayevaluationcomparedtotraditionalinpersonairwayevaluationaprospectiveobservationalstudy