Introduction Neonatal intubation is a challenging skill to acquire. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) found junior trainees had higher intubation success rates if their supervisor shared their airway view on a videolaryngoscope screen compared with intubations where the supervisor could not see the videolaryngoscope screen. The intubations in the trial were supervised by a group of experienced neonatologists who developed an intubation teaching package that aimed to be informative, consistent and supportive. We surveyed the trainees to assess their experiences of the intubation attempts.
Methods Trainees participating in the RCT completed questionnaires anonymously after each intubation attempt. Questionnaires used 5-point Likert scales and free comment sections. Quantitative analysis was performed using descriptive statistics. In a qualitative analysis, free comments were coded to identify central recurring themes.
Results Two hundred and six questionnaires were completed by 36 trainees. The majority reported that the guidance received during intubation was helpful, the postprocedure feedback was educational and their confidence levels were increased. Trainees appreciated a controlled environment and calm, consistent guidance. They found intubations in the delivery room, those involving unstable infants, large audiences and parental presence more stressful. Responses were positive whether the videolaryngoscope screen was visible or covered, emphasising the importance of consistent guidance. Overall, 16% of intubations were reported as intimidating.
Conclusion The shared airway view offered by videolaryngoscopy was well received. In addition, taking measures to control the setting, with standardised guidance and feedback, improved confidence and created a more positive learning experience.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors JEOS, MT, COFK and PGD developed the concept, designed and distributed the surveys. JEOS and SK collated the data, performed the analysis and wrote early drafts of the manuscript. All authors contributed to writing and editing the final manuscript.
Funding The original RCT was supported by The Royal Women’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Program (grant 606789).
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request.