Comparison of Airway Simulators for the AirwayScope® Video-Laryngoscope

Introduction:Although the importance of training using simulators is widely recognized, there are no reported comparative studies of training with simulators for laryngoscopes.We compared three airway simulators with the video-laryngoscope AirwayScope ® to determine their effectiveness and usefulness.Methods: Three simulators-DAM (simulator A), SaveMan ® (simulator B), and Heartsim ® (simulator C)-were compared with Simman ® (simulator D).Altogether, 70 paramedics were divided into three groups.Following practice using simulators A, B, and C, each group underwent evaluation using simulator D (test 1).We then evaluated the ease of intubating each of the simulators (test 2).We measured the intubation time (T) from blade insertion to visual confirmation of the glottis (T1), to tracheal tube insertion through the glottis (T2), and to chest rise confirmation (T3).Finally, we evaluated the usefulness and relative ease of use of each simulator. Results:In test 1, all tracheal intubations were successful.There were also no significant differences in T1, T2, or T3 among the practice simulators.In test 2, however, T1 and T2 took significantly longer with simulator A than with simulators B and D. The T3 intubation was also longer with simulator A than simulator B (P<0.05).Simulator A was more difficult to intubate than B or D (P<0.05).Conclusions: Test 1 results indicated that there were no differences in intubation times, and all intubations were successful.Evaluation of the simulators showed differences in their ease of use, although no differences were found in their usefulness for training.