Question · asked by 1 review
Macintosh‐style videolaryngoscopy vs direct laryngoscopy: Oesophageal intubation
- Population
- adults undergoing tracheal intubation
- Intervention
- Macintosh‐style videolaryngoscopy
- Comparison
- direct laryngoscopy
- Outcome
- Oesophageal intubation
Macintosh‐style videolaryngoscopy showed no clear difference in oesophageal intubation compared with direct laryngoscopy (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Macintosh‐style videolaryngoscopy vs direct laryngoscopy Oesophageal intubation · adults undergoing tracheal intubation Macintosh‐style videolaryngoscopy showed no clear difference in oesophageal intubation compared with direct laryngoscopy (low certainty). Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation (2022) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.51 [0.22, 1.21] | 14 studies · 2404 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.