Intubating on pillows

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
coffeebythelake said:
I think the view with glidescope is much better than any other video laryngoscope out there.
Click to expand...
Respectfully disagree. Maybe the glidescopes I've used are old as ****, same with the cmacs on the overhead monitor, but I've frequently see blurred images, weirdly like "pixelated" video etc etc. On the otherhand, the mcgraths I've used have all been hi def crystal clear images.
 
MirrorTodd said:
Respectfully disagree. Maybe the glidescopes I've used are old as ****, same with the cmacs on the overhead monitor, but I've frequently see blurred images, weirdly like "pixelated" video etc etc. On the otherhand, the mcgraths I've used have all been hi def crystal clear images.
Click to expand...
Opposite experience for me. Glidescope = great. C-mac sucks.
 
abolt18 said:
Opposite experience for me. Glidescope = great. C-mac sucks.
Click to expand...

I think glidescope is the most intuitive to use and the position of the camera and its field of view is wide enough that you can see your endotracheal tube without it obscuring the glottic opening in the "money shot". CMAC view is too narrow, too upclose. I've had several instances where we started with the CMAC, was unable to intubate because the view sucked, and switched to a glidescope and was subsequently successful. I've also used the King vision and McGrath scopes which are nice and portable for emergency airways outside of the OR, but also one tier below glidescope.
 
MirrorTodd said:
Respectfully disagree. Maybe the glidescopes I've used are old as ****, same with the cmacs on the overhead monitor, but I've frequently see blurred images, weirdly like "pixelated" video etc etc. On the otherhand, the mcgraths I've used have all been hi def crystal clear images.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah I've seen a few of those "pixelated" videos
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top