ABSTRACT : Video laryngoscopes provide better view and can improve ease of intubation. The aim was to compare the ease, efficacy and the usability of them during routine airway management. The primary endpoint was duration of intubation and the secondary endpoints were Cormack and Lehane grade of laryngoscopic view, number of intubation attempts and incidence of complications.

METHODS : The prospective randomized study was done in 60 patients, 18 to 65 years old comparing Mcgrath video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope. The aim was to compare the ease, efficacy and the usability of them during routine airway management. The primary endpoint was duration of intubation and the secondary endpoints were Cormack and Lehane grade of laryngoscopic view, number of intubation attempts and incidence of complications.

RESULTS : There was an increase in total duration of intubation with Mcgrath video laryngoscope with 42.9 ± 19.5 seconds compared to Macintosh laryngoscope with 17.9 ± 4.6 seconds. Number of intubation attempts required with Mcgrath video laryngoscope was also more. In Mcgrath group 6 patients (20%) required more than 120 seconds to get intubated and only 73.3% were intubated in 1 attempt while patients in Macintosh group had 100% successful intubation in 1 attempt.

CONCLUSIONS : Duration of laryngoscopy, intubation and total duration of intubation were significantly higher in McGrath group than in Macintosh group. McGrath group required more number of intubation attempts.