Publication: A validation study of the intubation difficulty scale for obese patients
Issued Date
2016-09-01
Resource Type
ISSN
18734529
09528180
09528180
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-84966365389
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. Vol.33, (2016), 86-91
Suggested Citation
Arunotai Siriussawakul, Panita Limpawattana A validation study of the intubation difficulty scale for obese patients. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. Vol.33, (2016), 86-91. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.03.016 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/41173
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
A validation study of the intubation difficulty scale for obese patients
Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Study objective An intubation difficulty scale (IDS) is the most commonly used tool to pronounce difficult intubation among obese patients in research area. There have not been any studies on assessing the use of IDS. The objectives were to determine the performance of the IDS among obese patients to define difficult tracheal intubation (DI) according to the subjective assessment of the difficulty experienced and to identify their optimal cutoff points. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Tertiary care hospital. Patients Adult obese Thai patients who underwent conventional endotracheal intubation. Measurements Data of subjective assessment of the difficulty experienced by category - easy, somewhat difficult, and difficult - were collected from experienced anesthetic personnel who performed endotracheal intubation. IDS scores were collected by research assistants. Main results There were 552 obese patients recruited. The incidence of somewhat DI was 14.3% and that of DI was 2.2%. The overall performance of the IDS using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of somewhat DI is 0.99 with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.98 and 0.99 and that of DI is 1 (95% confidence interval, 1-1). For somewhat DI, the optimal cutoff point is 2; it provides sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 92%. The IDS scores of 5 indicate DI which had sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 100%. Conclusions The IDS remains a good tool to declare DI among obese patients. It is recommended that a score of 2 or higher is an optimal cutoff point to indicate somewhat DI and a score of 5 or higher is an optimal cutoff point to indicate DI.