Comparative Evaluation of Videolaryngoscopy and Direct Laryngoscopy for Nasotracheal Intubation in Adult Surgical Patients
Abstract
<p>Student Name</p> <p>Institutional Affiliation</p> <p>Instructor's Name</p> <p>Course</p> <p>Date</p> <h2>Comparative Evaluation of Videolaryngoscopy and Direct Laryngoscopy for Nasotracheal Intubation</h2> <p>The article aimed to establish a comparison between videolaryngoscopy (VL) and direct laryngoscopy (DL) in search of better outcomes for nasotracheal intubation (NTI) in adult patients undergoing surgical procedures. NTI is a medical practice commonly applied in maxillofacial and oral surgeries to safeguard airways and ensure a favorable surgical field (Jiang et al., 2019). The practice can also be applied to patients with cervical spine disorders and related conditions. In clinical settings, NTI with direct laryngoscopy is the most commonly used technique, although it requires additional manipulations. On the other hand, videolaryngoscopy is frequently used for orotracheal intubation (OTI) in patients with both normal and difficult airways (Jiang et al., 2019). After considering numerous observational studies, the article revealed that the use of videolaryngoscopy demonstrated a higher success rate than direct laryngoscopy.</p> <h2>Research Design and Methodological Approach of the Systematic Review</h2> <p>Additionally, the article followed the PRISMA guidelines by utilizing four electronic databases during the literature search process. These databases included PubMed, the Register of Controlled Trials (RCTs), EMBASE, and ScienceDirect. The review excluded studies with incomplete publications and unavailable full-text articles. However, only randomized controlled trials comparing videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for NTI in adults aged 18 years and above were included (Jiang et al., 2019). During the review process, videolaryngoscopy was used in the intervention groups, while direct laryngoscopy was used in the control groups. The outcomes were categorized into primary and secondary measures, including overall success rate and first-attempt success rate, as well as intubation time. In addition, the data were extracted by different authors who applied various evaluation measures to the included studies.</p> <h2>Analysis of Study Findings and Clinical Outcomes</h2> <p>The results section revealed that the search strategy initially identified 103 studies. After applying eligibility criteria related to relevance, intubation procedures, grouping methods, full-text availability, and randomized controlled trial requirements, only 14 studies remained eligible for inclusion. These studies provided a total of 20 comparisons (Jiang et al., 2019). An overall success rate was reported across all included studies. The findings indicated no significant variation in the overall success rate between direct laryngoscopy and videolaryngoscopy.</p> <h2>Reference List</h2> <p>Jiang, J., Ma, D. X., Li, B., Wu, A. S., & Xue, F. S. (2019). Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. <em>Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, 52</em>, 6–16.</p>