Objective:

Training students on simulators before allowing their direct contact with patients is well accepted. There is no clinical or manikin-based simulation study in the literature comparing tracheal intubation with Airtraq, laryngeal mask airway (LMA) CTrach and Macintosh laryngoscopes performed by medical students having no prior intubation experience.

Methods:

After obtaining written informed consents, 123 participants were included in the study. The participants were asked to intubate the manikin five times with each device randomly. After all the participants had completed their fifth intubations, the measurements were performed. The primary outcome variables were the first-attempt success rate and the time for a successful intubation, while the secondary outcome variables were to determine the scores of dental trauma, the difficulty visual analogue scale and the optimization manoeuvres.

Results:

The LMA CTrach group revealed a significantly higher number of intubation attempts. The mean time for a successful intubation was the longest in the LMA CTrach group (17.66±8.22 s, p<0.05). Students defined the Airtraq as the easiest to use and the Macintosh laryngoscope as the most difficult device to use and learn. Dental trauma severity was significantly lower in the Airtraq group than in the other groups (p<0.05), and it was found to be 0 in 81.1% in the Airtraq group. The head extension optimization manoeuvre rate was significantly higher with the Macintosh laryngoscope than with the Airtraq laryngoscope (p<0.05).

Conclusion:

This study, in which different types of laryngoscopes were compared, revealed that the Airtraq laryngoscope has advantages, such as shorter intubation duration, less additional optimization manoeuvres, less dental trauma intensity and is easier to learn compared with the LMA CTrach and Macintosh laryngoscopes.

Keywords: Airway, tracheal intubation, laryngoscope