Review Article

Insertion Success of the Laryngeal Tube in Emergency Airway Management

Table 3

Success rates of laryngeal tubes in prehospital airway management by different providers (first responder, physicians, paramedics, registered nurses, and physicians).

AuthorsStudyDeviceHealthcare providerFPISOPIS
[, (%)]95% CI[, (%)]95% CI

Länkimäki et al., 2013 [66]p, prehospital, OOHCALTFirst responder6446, 71.960.9%–82.9%59, 92.285.6%–98.8%
Frascone et al., 2013 [61]p, prehospital, emerg.LTS-DParamedics/RN3829, 76.362.8%–89.8%32, 84.272.6%–95.8%
Müller et al., 2013 [67]p, prehospital, OOHCALT-DParamedics130108, 83.176.6%–89.5%121, 93.188.7%–97.4%
Schalk et al., 2012 [69]p, prehospital, emerg.LTS-DPhysicians/paramedics303223, 73.668.6%–78.6%296, 97.896.0%–99.4%
Sunde et al., 2012 [72]r, prehospital, OOHCALT, NSParamedics347258, 74.469.8%–78.9%296, 85.381.6%–89.0%
Gahan et al., 2011 [63]r, prehospital, OOHCALT-DFirst responder167147, 88.083.1%–92.9%NS
Frascone et al., 2011 [62]p, prehospital, emerg.LTS-DParamedics12886, 67.259.1%–75.3%103, 80.573.6%–87.3%
Schalk et al., 2011 [71]p, prehospital, traumaLTS-DPhysicians/paramedics5750, 87.779.2%–96.2%56, 98.294.8%–100.0%
Schalk et al., 2010 [70]p, prehospital, emerg.LT-D/LTS-DPhysicians/paramedics157123, 78.371.9%–84.8%152, 96.894.1%–99.6%
Wiese et al., 2009 [73]p, prehospital, emerg.LT-DParamedics9285, 92.487.0%–97.8%92, 100.096.8%–100.0%
Russi et al., 2008 [68]p, prehospital, emerg.King LTParamedics1312, 92.377.8%–100.0%13, 100.079.4%–100.0%
Guyette et al., 2007 [64]r, prehospital, emerg.LT-DParamedics/nurses2624, 92.382.1%–100.0%26, 100.089.2%–100.0%
Kette et al., 2005 [65]p, prehospital, OOHCALTNurses3021, 70.053.6%–86.4%26, 86.774.5%–98.8%

Cumulative sum ()15521212/15521272/1385
(%)78.176.0%–80.2%91.890.4%–93.3%

NS: not stated; p: prospective; r: retrospective; OOHCA: out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; emerg.: emergency/no cardiac arrest; FPIS: first-pass insertion success; OPIS: overall-pass insertion success; RN: registered nurses. If the success rate was 100%, it was assumed that the lower confidence interval (CI) was reached and that the next attempt would fail.