The effectiveness of rapid sequence intubation (RSI) versus non-RSI in emergency department: an analysis of multicenter prospective observational study

Table 6 Random-effects model of rapid sequence intubation versus non-rapid sequence intubation in all patients and patients at level I trauma centers

	Success on 1st attempt (all patients [n = 2365]), Adjusted OR (95% CI)	Success on 1st attempt (patients at level I trauma centers [n = 2147]), Adjusted OR (95% CI)
Primary exposure
RSI (vs. non-RSI)	2.3 (1.8–2.9)	2.0 (1.6–2.6)
Covariates
Age decile	1.0 (1.0–1.0)	1.0 (1.0–1.0)
Male (vs. female)	0.8 (0.7–1.0)	0.8 (0.6–0.9)
Estimated body weight decile	1.0 (1.0–1.0)	1.0 (1.0–1.0)
Primary indication
Medical indication^a	1 [reference]	1 [reference]
Trauma^b	0.6 (0.5–0.8)	0.6 (0.5–0.8)
Device
Direct laryngoscopy	1 [reference]	1 [reference]
Video laryngoscopy	0.6 (0.4–1.1)	0.7 (0.3–1.6)
Other^c	0.9 (0.3–3.4)	0.9 (0.2–3.3)
Intubator
Emergency physician	1 [reference]	1 [reference]
Transitional-year resident^d	0.2 (0.1–0.3)	0.2 (0.1–0.3)
Emergency medicine resident	0.5 (0.4–0.7)	0.6 (0.4–0.8)
Other^e	0.3 (0.2–0.5)	0.4 (0.3–0.6)

^aDefined as altered mental status, respiratory failure, shock, airway obstruction, asthma, or other medical indications
^bDefined as head trauma, shock, facial/neck trauma, burn/inhalation, or other trauma indications
^cDefined as direct laryngoscopy or video laryngoscopy with gum elastic bougie or lighted stylet
^dDefined as postgraduate years 1 or 2
^eDefined as surgery, anesthesia, or pediatrics

ISSN: 1865-1380