King Vision aBlade system?

TransportJockey

TransportJockey

Forum Chief
Messages
8,623
Reaction score
1,675
Points
113
TransportJockey said:
https://www.boundtree.com/king-visi...6-kv131-pharm-21220-50.aspx?search=2146-KV131

Has anyone used the King Vision aBlade system? Looks like it adds pediatric capabilities to the KV system. I'm curious about it.
Click to expand...

Haven't had one in hand yet to play with, but my FD (part-time gig) is talking about adding them for just that purpose. I am not a fan of the King Vision in the least, and it is still our option to use it, which I don't. Still do regular DL when I have to intubate there which isn't very often.

We just got brand new CMAC PM's at HEMS job which go in service next week which I am overly excited for :D....
 
I’m curious about your experience with KV, and why you dislike them.


CANMAN said:
Haven't had one in hand yet to play with, but my FD (part-time gig) is talking about adding them for just that purpose. I am not a fan of the King Vision in the least, and it is still our option to use it, which I don't. Still do regular DL when I have to intubate there which isn't very often.

We just got brand new CMAC PM's at HEMS job which go in service next week which I am overly excited for :D....
Click to expand...
 
I like the KV for its relative simplicity, and portability. Is it the greatest, or most proficient VL on the market? Probably not, but it’s efficient and has served me well on more than one bull-necked, grade 3 or 4 DL view.

I had a chance to play with the McGrath thanks to a chance encounter with our medical director, and can say and see how the KV would be an inferior VL. I really do like Dr. Jarvis’ video on the KV, and techniques he promotes at Wilco:
P.S.- sorry @TransportJockey, no first hand experience with their latest blades.
 
NomadicMedic said:
I’m curious about your experience with KV, and why you dislike them.
Click to expand...

I don't love the ergonomics of it. I came from the original CMAC's and when my department announced we were getting VL although not a CMAC I was excited to try and have a device on the unit. To me I don't like the preferred method of holding down low on the blade to prevent it from going too posterior. I absolutely hate the fact you have to attach the cord recording device, press and hold for 3 seconds, is it recording or is it not.... I don't care for the channeled blade system either. For marketing it and talking it up in the training videos like it operates like regular DL, there are some muscle memory items you do have to change to use it to its full potential. We are required to use the channeled blade and record IF we used the device at my ground service.

The screen/clarity on the CMAC is superior, ergonomics are amazing, recording is one touch with clearly defined "green" for recording without the need for additional cordage. CMAC can continue to be used as DL if there is a camera/screen failure. It's just a better all round device. Like Remi said, I was spoiled since I started with CMAC so I just could never really get on board with the KV as much as I have tried.
 
I gotcha. I was in on the trials for VL at my last service. I was a fan of the intubrite, and didn’t love the KV, but it came down to price. We didn’t trial the CMAC. We did play with the Pentax, which had some interesting features.
 
I’m not familiar with the A blade, but I feel like for prehospital, the King vision is pretty much where it’s at. Not perfect, but the portability is hard to beat.

C-Mac is as good as it gets. Glide scope is next best.
 
I've used KV's at my last few services and I have a first pass rate of near 100% using it, so I was curious when I saw this new piece of kit from them. The ability to use them for pediatrics would make them even more useful in the field. I've used the Glide Scope and liked it as well, but since most of my practice is with the KV I'm a little biased towards it.
 
C-Mac is the perfect VL in my opinion. I do not like anything with a proprietary blade. The hyperacute angle of the King/Glidescope may be helpful for difficult anterior airways however it is not worth losing the ability to use it as a traditional blade incase of video failure or contamination.
 
Chase said:
The hyperacute angle of the King/Glidescope may be helpful for difficult anterior airways however it is not worth losing the ability to use it as a traditional blade incase of video failure or contamination.
Click to expand...
I believe this is the reason we’re to go DL first, and if nothing is visualized, then VL via the KV is an (IMO) absolute must. With that, there are times when we as providers should be able to gauge the anticipated difficulty of the patients airway (e.g., short neck, small mouth, large tongue).

The only times so far I can recall utilizing the KV is either with this type of presentation being immediately anticipated, or if viewed upon via direct laryngoscopy. Which, at that point the KV works as expected.

To me, old-fashioned DL is still very helpful in its own right, but seeing how most hospitals only use VL in our local ED’s I can’t not imagine eventually ground crews no longer being able to directly intubate, and flight crews being required to utilize VL only. The ability to utilize the CMac in both fashions is rather alluring. Ah, the wave of the future...
 
Other than being clear plastic, is there a difference between the “a blade” and their original blades?
 
FiremanMike said:
Other than being clear plastic, is there a difference between the “a blade” and their original blades?
Click to expand...
Yea it allows pediatric sizes
 
I heart cmac
 
VentMonkey said:
I like the KV for its relative simplicity, and portability. Is it the greatest, or most proficient VL on the market? Probably not, but it’s efficient and has served me well on more than one bull-necked, grade 3 or 4 DL view.

I had a chance to play with the McGrath thanks to a chance encounter with our medical director, and can say and see how the KV would be an inferior VL. I really do like Dr. Jarvis’ video on the KV, and techniques he promotes at Wilco:
P.S.- sorry @TransportJockey, no first hand experience with their latest blades.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the video VentMonkey this was actually pretty informative. We use kings in the city but not every time. I've found that old school medics tend to carry a pride concept when it comes to DL and feel obsolete if they have to have any type of aid. In the end it's about the patient and providing the best care possible, but definitely something I've noticed.
 
Colt45 said:
Thanks for the video VentMonkey this was actually pretty informative.
Click to expand...
Glad I could help:). I like our current county medical director so much more than our previous one, but Jarvis has got to be way up on the list of EMS medical directors in my book.

You oughta check out his airway series with Tyler (Christifulli), I wanna say it’s a 3 part? series on Tyler’s podcast.
 
My biggest beef with the "channeled" tube delivery VL blade is that what you see may not be the trajectory the tube needs to take for success. And you don't know that until you fail. It would be like landing an aircraft with just what you see out of the windshield without any manipulation of manual controls. The tube and the scope/blade need to be independent of each other in order to take full advantage of VL. Why handcuff yourself by welding the tube to the scope when you have such a sophisticated way of visualizing the glottis? If a good view is achieved, a failed intubation is just not acceptable. That is a problem with the King product.

The greatest advantage of the glidescope (my personal favorite, with all due respect to my esteemed colleague) is the curved steel, manipulatable stylette that comes with it to over come the odd twists and turns that are required to place a tube in difficult patients...which in my opinion would include any out of hospital intubations.
 
E tank said:
My biggest beef with the "channeled" tube delivery VL blade is that what you see may not be the trajectory the tube needs to take for success. And you don't know that until you fail. It would be like landing an aircraft with just what you see out of the windshield without any manipulation of manual controls. The tube and the scope/blade need to be independent of each other in order to take full advantage of VL. Why handcuff yourself by welding the tube to the scope when you have such a sophisticated way of visualizing the glottis?

The greatest advantage of the glidescope (my personal favorite, with all due respect to my esteemed colleague) is the curved steel, manipulatable stylette that comes with it to over come the odd twists and turns that are required to place a tube in difficult patients...which in my opinion would include any out of hospital intubations.
Click to expand...
That's why even with the channel, every tube I attempt is done with abougie down the channel. It helps with that
 
TransportJockey said:
That's why even with the channel, every tube I attempt is done with abougie down the channel. It helps with that
Click to expand...

A wise approach...and I wouldn't be too wedded to that channel either...goes without saying, I know...
 
E tank said:
A wise approach...and I wouldn't be too wedded to that channel either...goes without saying, I know...
Click to expand...
Its all my agency orders unfortunately. But i use it both in ans out of the channel. I might have someone film me tubing a dummy soon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top