Summary

Background and objective: We tested the feasibility of using the intubating laryngeal mask airway Fastrach™ (ILMA) as a ventilatory device and for flexible lightwand-guided tracheal intubation for out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation by an emergency physician. Methods: After completion of a training programme, a single experienced emergency physician used the technique for all patients requiring out-of-hospital tracheal intubation over a 10-month period. If access to the head and neck was limited, the intubating laryngeal mask airway was inserted from below and to the side, otherwise it was inserted from above the head. Data about the time for the ambulance to reach the patient, whether or not access to the head and neck was limited, whether or not circulation was successfully restored, and the insertion and intubation success rates were noted. Results: The mean (range) time for the ambulance to reach the patient was 12 (10–20) min. Access to the head and neck was limited in 8/37 (22%). Circulation was successfully restored in 10/37 (27%). The intubating laryngeal mask airway was successfully inserted at the first attempt in 35/37 (95%) and at the second attempt in 2/37 (5%). The tracheal tube was successfully inserted in 25/37 (67.5%) at the first attempt, 7/37 (19%) at the second attempt and 5/37 (13.5%) at the third attempt. There were no overall failures for intubating laryngeal mask airway insertion or tracheal intubation. There were no differences in success rate between positions. Oesophageal intubation was detected and corrected in 2/37 (5%). Conclusion: The intubating laryngeal mask airway has a high success rate as a ventilatory device and as a flexible lightwand-guided airway intubator during out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation by a well-trained emergency physician. This technique may be particularly useful when there is limited access to the head and neck.

Summary:

Background and objective: Several new techniques and agents (e.g. ropivacaine) have been introduced in regional anaesthesia to improve patients outcome and safety. The beneficial effects on patient outcome are clear with these techniques, however, no information is available about their pattern and frequency of use in clinical practice. This study presents data concerning the current practice of regional anaesthesia in Germany. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to every German anaesthesia department (n = 1381). Questions focused on the frequency and range of regional anaesthetic procedures employed, with attention also to the organizational structural of the individual institution. Results: Six hundred and sixty-seven questionnaires were returned anonymously, representing a return rate of 48.3%. In hospitals with less than 200 beds, the number of regional anaesthetics was markedly higher compared to large hospitals with more than 400 beds. In contrast, small hospitals tended to provide only basic techniques of regional anaesthesia, whereas larger hospitals implemented more advanced techniques. Bupivacaine remains the most commonly used long-lasting local anaesthetic. Staff structure was also different in small departments – patient care was performed by board certified anaesthesiologists while residents were responsible for the patients in larger departments. Conclusions: In small hospitals a majority of board certified anaesthesiologists rely on basic regional anaesthesia techniques. In large departments some consultants provide the entire spectrum of regional anaesthesia, with the majority of cases transferred to the residents responsibility. These results indicate the strong need to improve residency programs with regard to regional anaesthesia.