Skip to main content

Table 3 Paired analysis of devices where the mean time to intubation was statistically significantly different (only pairs where adjusted p–values were < 0.05 are shown)

From: Comparison of five video-assisted intubation devices by novice and expert laryngoscopists for use in the aeromedical evacuation environment

Group   Dunn’s Test p valuea
Novice group
 NAL ground
  Airtraqb vs. C-MAC 0.002
Airtraqb vs. GlideScope 0.020
C-MAC vs. AWSb 0.014
 DAL stanchion
  GlideScope vs. AWSb 0.050
 DAL ground
  Airtraqb vs. C-MAC 0.027
Airtraqb vs. Coopdech 0.034
C-MAC vs. AWSb 0.003
Coopdech vs. AWSb 0.006
 DAB stanchion
  C-MAC vs. AWSb 0.002
GlideScope vs. AWSb 0.002
 DAB ground
  Airtraqb vs. C-MAC 0.020
C-MAC vs. AWSb <0.001
GlideScope vs. AWSb 0.004
 Expert group
  DAL ground
  Coopdech vs. AWSb 0.009
  DAB stanchion
  C-MAC vs. AWSb 0.043
Coopdech vs. AWSb 0.046
  1. NAL Normal airway with lights on, DAL Difficult airway with lights on, DAB Difficult airway with blackout conditions. BH-adjusted p < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. aDunn’s Test p value adjusted for false discovery rate using Benjamin-Hochberg (BH) procedure; bThe device with shorter time to intubation in the paired results