Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Emergency Medicine and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Research article

The intuitive use of laryngeal airway tools by first year medical students

Johannes Bickenbach1*, Gereon Schälte2, Stefan Beckers2, Michael Fries2, Matthias Derwall2 and Rolf Rossaint2

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Surgical Intensive Care, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Germany

2 Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Germany

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Emergency Medicine 2009, 9:18  doi:10.1186/1471-227X-9-18

Published: 22 September 2009

Abstract

Background

Providing a secured airway is of paramount importance in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Although intubating the trachea is yet seen as gold standard, this technique is still reserved to experienced healthcare professionals. Compared to bag-valve facemask ventilation, however, the insertion of a laryngeal mask airway offers the opportunity to ventilate the patient effectively and can also be placed easily by lay responders. Obviously, it might be inserted without detailed background knowledge.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the intuitive use of airway devices by first-year medical students as well as the effect of a simple, but well-directed training programme. Retention of skills was re-evaluated six months thereafter.

Methods

The insertion of a LMA-Classic and a LMA-Fastrach performed by inexperienced medical students was compared in an airway model. The improvement on their performance after a training programme of overall two hours was examined afterwards.

Results

Prior to any instruction, mean time to correct placement was 55.5 ± 29.6 s for the LMA-Classic and 38.1 ± 24.9 s for the LMA-Fastrach. Following training, time to correct placement decreased significantly with 22.9 ± 13.5 s for the LMA-Classic and 22.9 ± 19.0 s for the LMA-Fastrach, respectively (p < 0.05). After six months, the results are comparable prior (55.6 ± 29.9 vs 43.1 ± 34.7 s) and after a further training period (23.5 ± 13.2 vs 26.6 ± 21.6, p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Untrained laypersons are able to use different airway devices in a manikin and may therefore provide a secured airway even without having any detailed background knowledge about the tool. Minimal theoretical instruction and practical skill training can improve their performance significantly. However, refreshment of knowledge seems justified after six months.