Scinovex
review Open AccessTop 1% cited

Predicting Difficult Intubation in Apparently Normal Patients

Anesthesiology · 2005 · Vol. 103(2) · pp. 429–437

Abstract

The objective of this study was to systematically determine the diagnostic accuracy of bedside tests for predicting difficult intubation in patients with no airway pathology. Thirty-five studies (50,760 patients) were selected from electronic databases. The overall incidence of difficult intubation was 5.8% (95% confidence interval, 4.5-7.5%). Screening tests included the Mallampati oropharyngeal classification, thyromental distance, sternomental distance, mouth opening, and Wilson risk score. Each test yielded poor to moderate sensitivity (20-62%) and moderate to fair specificity (82-97%). The most useful bedside test for prediction was found to be a combination of the Mallampati classification and thyromental distance (positive likelihood ratio, 9.9; 95% confidence interval, 3.1-31.9). Currently available screening tests for difficult intubation have only poor to moderate discriminative power when used alone. Combinations of tests add some incremental diagnostic value in comparison to the value of each test alone. The clinical value of bedside screening tests for predicting difficult intubation remains limited.

Airway Management and Intubation TechniquesTracheal and airway disordersForeign Body Medical CasesMedicineIntubationConfidence intervalAirwayPhysical therapyAnesthesiaInternal medicine

MeSH terms

HumansIntubation, IntratrachealMouthNeckOropharynxPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and SpecificityPoint-of-Care Systems
Citations
881
FWCI
18.60
field-weighted impact
References
50
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Cited by
Complications and failure of airway management
British Journal of Anaesthesia · 2012 · 510 citations
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.