rss
Emerg Med J 2005;22:99-102 doi:10.1136/emj.2003.008771
  • Original Article

Can an airway assessment score predict difficulty at intubation in the emergency department?

  1. M J Reed1,
  2. M J G Dunn1,
  3. D W McKeown2
  1. 1Emergency Department, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  2. 2Anaesthetic Department, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr M J Reed
 Emergency Department, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh EH16 4SA, UK; mattreed1hotmail.com
  • Accepted 9 December 2003

Abstract

Aim: To assess whether an airway assessment score based on the LEMON method is able to predict difficulty at intubation in the emergency department.

Methods: Patients requiring endotracheal intubation in the resuscitation room of a UK teaching hospital between June 2002 and September 2003 were assessed on criteria based on the LEMON method. At laryngoscopy, the Cormack and Lehane grade was recorded. An airway assessment score was devised and assessed.

Results: 156 patients were intubated during the study period. There were 114 Cormack and Lehane grade 1 intubations, 29 grade 2 intubations, 11 grade 3 intubations, and 2 grade 4 intubations. Patients with large incisors (p<0.001), a reduced inter-incisor distance (p<0.05), or a reduced thyroid to floor of mouth distance (p<0.05) were all more likely to have a poor laryngoscopic view (grade 2, 3, or 4). Patients with a high airway assessment score were more likely to have a poor laryngoscopic view compared with those patients with a low airway assessment score (p<0.05).

Conclusions: An airway assessment score based on criteria of the LEMON method is able to successfully stratify the risk of intubation difficulty in the emergency department. Patients with a poor laryngoscopic view (grades 2, 3, or 4) were more likely to have large incisors, a reduced inter-incisor distance, and a reduced thyroid to floor of mouth distance. They were also more likely to have a higher airway assessment score than those patients with a good laryngoscopic view.

Footnotes

  • Funding: none.

  • Conflicts of interest: none declared.

Responses to this article

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.