Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14408/KJEMS.2017.21.3.007

Which is the proper insertion method of laryngeal mask airway according to the rescuer's position? : Comparison between index finger insertion and thumb insertion  

Chun, Kyoung-Ha (Department of Emergency Medical Service, Kongju National University)
Moon, Jun-Dong (Department of Emergency Medical Service, Kongju National University)
Publication Information
The Korean Journal of Emergency Medical Services / v.21, no.3, 2017 , pp. 7-16 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion from different positions, using different methods, on the quality of the insertion, for identifying a more convenient and effective insertion method. Methods: In a model ambulance, 30 paramedic students performed the LMA insertion procedure, in four different settings, combinations of the rescuer's position (at the head end of the patient, at the side of the patient), and insertion technique (index finger insertion, thumb insertion), in a randomized order. Quality of insertion index and convenience of use were measured. Results: The quality of insertion index (tidal volume, gastric insufflation, airway pressure, airway sealing pressure, midline positions, insertion success grade, and insertion time) were not significantly different among four different settings. However LMA insertion from the anterior (head) end, using the index finger method compared to the thumb method was found to be significantly more convenient. Conclusion: We recommend using the more convenient and familiar LMA insertion method, between index finger insertion and thumb insertion, regardless of rescuer's position.
Keywords
Laryngeal mask airway; Index finger insertion; Thumb insertion; Quality of insertion; Rescuer's position;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Matta BF, Marsh DS, Nevin M. Laryngeal mask airway: a more successful method of insertion. J Clin Anesth 1995;7(2):132-5.   DOI
2 Ghai B, Makkar JK, Bhardwaj N, Wig J. Laryngeal mask airway insertion in children: comparison between rotational, lateral and standard technique. Paediatr Anaesth 2008;18(4):308-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9592.2008.02434.x   DOI
3 Benumof JL. Laryngeal mask airway and the ASA difficult airway algorithm. Anesthesiology 1996;84(3):686-99.   DOI
4 Asai T, Barclay K, McBeth C, Vaughan RS. Cricoid pressure applied after placement of the laryngeal mask prevents gastric insufflation but inhibits ventilation. Br J Anaesth 1996;76(6):772-6.   DOI
5 Shin SY, Lee JG, Roh SG. Comparative analysis of tidal volume and airway pressure with a bag-valve mask using RespiTrainer. Fire Sci. Eng 2014;28(6):76-81. https://doi.org/10.7731/KIFSE.2014.28.6.076   DOI
6 Kim HJ, Lee SK. A comparative easiness of blind orotracheal intubation using laryngeal mask airway with two different head positions. Korean J Anesthesiol 2000;39(4):469-75.   DOI
7 Son SC, Ko YK, Lee SJ. Comparison of ETT and LMA on respiratory mechanics during the induction of general anesthesia in children. Korean J Anesthesiol 2004;47(6):772-8.   DOI
8 Choi HK, Jung HK. Simulation study for Bag-valve-mask application guideline on pathologic pulmonary condition. Korean J Emerg Med Ser 2013;17(3):21-8. https://doi.org/10.14408/KJEMS.2013.17.3.021   DOI
9 Cork RC, Depa RM, Standen JR. Prospective comparison of use of the laryngeal mask and endotracheal tube for ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg 1994;79(4):719-27.
10 Keller C, Brimacombe JR, Keller K, Morris R. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients. Br J Anaesth 1999;82(2):286-7.   DOI
11 Hwang JY, Cho KJ. Comparison of tracheal intubation using the Macintosh laryngoscope versus the intubating laryngeal mask airway. Korean J Emerg Med Ser 2012;16(3):19-28.   DOI
12 Barata I. The laryngeal mask airway: prehospital and emergency department use. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2008;26(4):1069-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emc.2008.07.006   DOI
13 Brain AI. Historical aspects and future directions. Int Anesthesiol Clin 1998;36(2):1-18.   DOI
14 Jeong JS, Hong KJ, Shin SD, Suh GJ, Song KJ. Evaluation of the appropriateness of prehospital emergency care by 119 rescue services in Seoul Metropolitan area. J Korean Soc Emerg Med 2008;19(3):233-44.
15 Teleflex. LMA instruction for use. Available at http://www.lmaco-ifu.com, 2017
16 Goyal M, Dutt A, Khan Joad AS. Laryngeal mask airway insertion by classic and thumb insertion technique: a comparison. F1000Res 2013;2:123. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-123.v1.   DOI
17 Davies PR, Tighe SQ, Greenslade GL, Evans GH. Laryngeal mask airway and tracheal tube insertion by unskilled personnel. Lancet 1990;336(8721):977-9.   DOI
18 Räsänen J. The laryngeal mask airway-first class on difficult airways. Finnanest Nro 2000;33(3):302-5.
19 Ocker H, Wenzel V, Schmucker P, Steinfath M, Dörges V. A comparison of the laryngeal tube with the laryngeal mask airway during routine surgical procedures. Anesth Analg 2002;95(4):1094-7.   DOI
20 Keller C, Puhringer F, Brimacombe JR. Influence of cuff volume on oropharyngeal leak pressure and fibreoptic position with the laryngeal mask airway. Br J Anaesth 1998;81(2):186-7.   DOI
21 Korean emergency airway management society. Manual of emergency airway management (Ron MW, Michael FM). 4th ed. Gyeonggi: Koonja, 2013. 108-9.
22 Brimacombe JR, Berry A. The incidence of aspiration associated with the laryngeal mask airway: a meta-analysis of published literature. J Clin Anesth 1995;7(4):297-305.   DOI