• DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.03809.x
• Corpus ID: 13037753

Evaluation of Frova, single‐use intubation introducer, in a manikin. Comparison with Eschmann multiple‐use introducer and Portex single‐use introducer *

@article{Hodovi2004EvaluationOF,
  title={Evaluation of Frova, single‐use intubation introducer, in a manikin. Comparison with Eschmann multiple‐use introducer and Portex single‐use introducer *},
  author={Iljaz Hod{\vz}ovi{\'c} and Ian Peter Latto and Antony Robert Wilkes and J. E. Hall and William W. Mapleson},
  journal={Anaesthesia},
  year={2004},
  volume={59}
}

• I. Hodžović, I. P. Latto, +2 authors W. Mapleson
• Published 1 August 2004
• Medicine
• Anaesthesia

In a randomised cross‐over study, 48 anaesthetists attempted to place a Frova single‐use introducer, an Eschmann multiple‐use introducer and a Portex single‐use introducer in the trachea of a manikin set up to simulate a grade 3 laryngoscopic view. The anaesthetists were blinded to success (tracheal placement) or failure (oesophageal placement). Successful placement (proportion, 95% confidence interval) of either the Frova introducer (65%, 50–77%) or the Eschmann introducer (60%, 46–73%) was significantly more likely than with the Portex introducer (8%, 3–20%). There were no significant differences between the success rates for the Frova and the Eschmann introducers. A separate experiment revealed that the peak force exerted by the Frova and Portex introducers was two to three times greater than that which could be exerted by the Eschmann introducer, p < 0.0001, indicating that the single‐use introducers are more likely to cause tissue trauma during placement.