Comparison of blind insertion advanced airway devices on cardiac and respiratory patients

Background: Effective airway management is critical during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), yet comparative data on blind insertion airway device (BIAD) placement success in rural prehospital settings are limited. Objectives: The study aims to address the literature gap in BIAD success by EMS providers in a rural county, providing preliminary evidence to inform airway equipment usage and BIAD funding decisions. Methods: A convenience sample was taken from January 2024 to April 2024 for King Airway usage and from April 2024 to July 2024 on Air-Q3-ILA. Device success was confirmed by auscultation and visual chest rise per EMS protocol at the first attempt. Device success was compared using Fisher’s Exact Test with a p-value (P<.05). Results: Twenty-seven (N=27) patients received either King Airway (n=13) or Air-Q3-ILA (n=14) device. First-attempt placement success rate was 92.6% overall. Two failures (7.4%), both with the King Airway, were due to incorrect sizing. No significant association was found between device type and first-attempt placement success rate (x2(1, n= = 27), p = .259). Conclusion: This study provided an initial insight into BIAD literature. Future research with a larger sample size may provide greater understanding into resource management for EMS providers.