Ellen de Kort

97 Evaluation of an Intubation Readiness Score 6 Table 3. Comparison of patient characteristics in patients with good and with inacceptable Viby-Mogensen intubation score after adequate IRS Good Viby- Mogensen intubation score (n = 89) Inacceptable Viby-Mogensen intubation score (n = 16) p value Male gender, n (%) 51 (57) 10 (63) 0.79 Gestational age, weeks 27.7 (6.8) 27.5 (5.2) 0.51 Birth weight, g 995 (810) 1,110 (1,238) 0.71 Postnatal age, days 1 (4) 0.5 (1) 0.07 Weight at intubation, g 1,032 (783) 1,100 (1,238) 0.80 Cumulative dose of propofol, mg/kg body weight 2.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.3) 0.29 Amount of propofol doses, n (%) 2 (1) 1.5 (1) 0.87 IRS 3, n (%) 56 (63) 6 (37.5) 0.10 Time between reaching good IRS and starting intubation, min 1 (2) 1 (2) 0.57 Data are median (interquartile ranges) unless otherwise indicated. We performed a univariate analysis to search for factors that could explain why the IRS did not adequately predict the sedation level during intubation in 15% of our study population. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 3. This table shows that gender, gestational age, birth weight, postnatal age, weight at intubation, cumulative dose of propofol, amount of propofol doses, IRS being 3 or 4, and time in minutes between reaching good IRS and starting the intubation did not differ significantly between patients who had good Viby-Mogensen intubation scores and patients who had inacceptable Viby-Mogensen intubation scores. In 55 of the patients with good Viby-Mogensen intubation scores and in 6 patients with inacceptable Viby-Mogensen intubation scores, the function of the person who performed the intubation was registered. In patients with good Viby-Mogensen intubation scores, the intubation was performed by a pediatric resident in 13 patients (24%), a nurse specialist in 20 (36%), a neonatal fellow in 5 (9%), and a neonatologist in 17 patients (31%). In patients with inacceptable Viby-Mogensen intubation scores, intubation was performed by a pediatric resident in 3 patients (50%), a nurse specialist in 1 (17%), and a neonatologist in 2 patients (33%). These differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.28). The reason for intubation was reported for 87 patients with good Viby-Mogensen intubation scores and for 15 patients with inacceptable Viby-Mogensen intubation scores. Respiratory distress syndrome was the reason in 39 (45%) and 11 (73%) patients, respectively, and