Anaesthesia providers accessibility and usage of video

Introduction Approaches to airway management have undergone a dramatic transformation since the advent of video laryngoscopy (VL). Access to VLs for anaesthesia providers (AP) in operating theatres in South Africa has not previously been described, and the current usage is unknown. Methods We designed a cross-sectional survey investigating AP access and type of VL, as well as AP usage of VL in general, in obstetric anaesthesia, and in patients infected with SARS CoV-2. By using a combination of survey and direct contact audit we atempted to contact all medical facilities with an operating theatre in South Africa. Results 98% (661/676) of hospitals provided responses to the survey or were contacted directly via telephone. Of the total 559 hospitals with operating theatres, 65% (362/559) had access to a VL. 84% (1983/2357) of theatres are found in hospitals which have access to a VL. Larger hospitals are more likely to have video laryngoscopes. The C-MAC® and GlideScope® VL account for 85% of devices found in South Africa. 71% (395/559) of hospitals reported providing obstetric theatre services, while 58% (229/395) of these reported having access to a VL. 54% (301/559) of hospitals reported performing intubatons on patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, of these 79% (238/301) reported having access to a VL. Discussion Our data quantified the expected inequality in the distributon of VLs. There are large discrepancies between the different provinces, as well as between state and privately funded hospitals in South Africa. Despite having become a common device, VL is underutilized, even in high-risk populations.

Grantor

Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine

Year dc:date.issued

2023

Author dc:creator

• Young, Matthew

Advisor dc:contributor.advisor

• Hofmeyr, Michael

• Anaesthesia &amp
• Perioperative Medicine

Handle dc:identifier.uri

http://hdl.handle.net/11427/39939

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/39939