The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of the C-MAC Video Laryngoscope to the Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope for Intubation in the Emergency Department
Open accessAbstract
Study objective We determine the proportion of successful intubations with the C-MAC video laryngoscope (C-MAC) compared with the direct laryngoscope in emergency department (ED) intubations. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data entered into a continuous quality improvement database during a 28-month period in an academic ED. After each intubation, the operator completed a standardized data form evaluating multiple aspects of the intubation, including patient demographics, indication for intubation, device(s) used, reason for device selection, difficult airway characteristics, number of attempts, and outcome of each attempt. Intubation was considered ultimately successful if the endotracheal tube was correctly inserted into the trachea with the initial device. An attempt was defined as insertion of the device into the mouth regardless of whether there was an attempt to pass the tube. The primary outcome measure was ultimate success. Secondary outcome measures were first-attempt success, Cormack-Lehane view, and esophageal intubation. Multivariate logistic regression analyses, with the inclusion of a propensity score, were performed for the outcome variables ultimate success and first-attempt success. Results During the 28-month study period, 750 intubations were performed with either the C-MAC with a size 3 or 4 blade or a direct laryngoscope with a Macintosh size 3 or 4 blade. Of these, 255 were performed with the C-MAC as the initial device and 495 with a Macintosh direct laryngoscope as the initial device. The C-MAC resulted in successful intubation in 248 of 255 cases (97.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 94.4% to 98.9%). A direct laryngoscope resulted in successful intubation in 418 of 495 cases (84.4%; 95% CI 81.0% to 87.5%). In the multivariate regression model, with a propensity score included, the C-MAC was positively predictive of ultimate success (odds ratio 12.7; 95% CI 4.1 to 38.8) and first-attempt success (odds ratio 2.2; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.8). When the C-MAC was used as a video laryngoscope, a Cormack-Lehane grade I or II view (video) was obtained in 117 of 125 cases (93.6%; 95% CI 87.8% to 97.2%), whereas when a direct laryngoscope was used, a grade I or II view was obtained in 410 of 495 cases (82.8%; 95% CI 79.2% to 86.1%). The C-MAC was associated with immediately recognized esophageal intubation in 4 of 255 cases (1.6%; 95% CI 0.4% to 4.0%), whereas a direct laryngoscope was associated with immediately recognized esophageal intubation in 24 of 495 cases (4.8%; 95% CI 3.1% to 7.1%). Conclusion When used for emergency intubations in the ED, the C-MAC was associated with a greater proportion of successful intubations and a greater proportion of Cormack-Lehane grade I or II views compared with a direct laryngoscope.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Manoach, S., & Paladino, L. (2007) · Annals of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.01.009 · Cited by 123
Cited by
Techniques, Success, and Adverse Events of Emergency Department Adult Intubations
Brown, C. A., Bair, A. E., Pallin, D. J., & Walls, R. M. (2015) · Annals of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.10.036 · Cited by 431
Driver, B. E., Prekker, M. E., Klein, L. R., Reardon, R. F., Miner, J. R., Fagerstrom, E. T., Cleghorn, M. R., McGill, J. W., & Cole, J. B. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.6496 · Cited by 313
Incidence and factors associated with cardiac arrest complicating emergency airway management
Heffner, A. C., Swords, D. S., Neale, M. N., & Jones, A. E. (2013) · Resuscitation · doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2013.07.022 · Cited by 194
Sakles, J. C., Corn, G. J., Hollinger, P., Arcaris, B., Patanwala, A. E., & Mosier, J. M. (2017) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/acem.13160 · Cited by 56
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sakles, J. C., Mosier, J., Chiu, S., Cosentino, M., & Kalin, L.
- Venue
- Annals of Emergency Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-12
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 739-748
- ISSN
- 0196-0644 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2066669772
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 24.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Comparison of the C-MAC Video Laryngoscope to the Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope for Intubation in the Emergency Department. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.03.031
- The paper
- Sakles, J. C., Mosier, J., Chiu, S., Cosentino, M., & Kalin, L. (2012). A Comparison of the C-MAC Video Laryngoscope to the Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope for Intubation in the Emergency Department. Annals of Emergency Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.03.031
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.