ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2026
Time to intubate with an innovative intubation device: a dual-center randomized crossover non-inferiority simulation study.
Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndotracheal intubation is a high-stakes intervention in emergency airway management, with patient safety closely linked to first-pass success and avoidance of repeated attempts. The Frankfurt Intubation Device (FID) is a bougie-inspired intubation device intended to provide fast protection against aspiration once positioned in the trachea.
methodsThis dual-center randomized crossover simulation study used an easy-to-intubate airway manikin. Ninety participants were divided into three groups of different experience (anesthesiologists, non-physician critical care staff, and medical students) to perform intubation with the Frankfurt Intubation Device (FID) and a standard endotracheal tube with stylet in randomized order. The primary outcome was non-inferiority of time to airway protection, measured from laryngoscope insertion to inflation of a cuffed device positioned in the trachea (T2; Δ = 5 s). Secondary outcomes included first-pass success, tooth damage, and exploratory assessment of training effects, with additional time-based outcomes assessed descriptively.
resultsAcross all participants, the FID was non-inferior to the endotracheal tube with stylet for T2 (mean paired difference − 0.77 s, 95% CI − 2.50 to 0.97; non-inferiority margin 5 s). Exploratory analyses demonstrated consistent non-inferiority for T2 across experience groups (G1–G3) and randomization sequences. First-pass success was high in both arms (FID 96.7% vs. ET+stylet 94.4%), while tooth damage occurred less frequently with the FID (7.8% vs. 14.4%). Training effects were observed in the simulator.
conclusionIn this standardized simulation study using an easy-to-intubate airway manikin, the Frankfurt Intubation Device demonstrated non-inferiority to conventional endotracheal intubation with stylet for time to airway protection. Secondary findings support continued staged evaluation of the FID, particularly in more challenging airway scenarios and among users with limited airway experience, where differences in procedural performance may become more apparent.
trial registrationNot applicable (simulation study).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.