Author: Lowrie Hamilton, BSc (Hons), RVN
Lowrie qualified in 2020 and graduated with her BSc (Hons) degree from the Royal Veterinary College in 2021. She currently works as an orthopaedic nurse in a large first opinion practice in Milton Keynes, where she loves monitoring and scrubbing into complex surgeries. In the future she hopes to complete certificates in anaesthesia and emergency and critical care.
Author: Sarah Batt-Williams, BSc (Hons), RVN, MSc Vet Ed, FHEA
Sarah is a senior teaching fellow and co-course director on the BSc and FdSc in veterinary nursing at the Royal Veterinary College. She has been involved in the further and higher education of veterinary nurses since 2016, having previously worked within university, referral, first opinion and charity practices in the UK and Australia, while also seeing practice in America and South Africa. She is interested in the regulation of the profession, professional identity and evidence-based veterinary nursing.
ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to further understand the airway management methods used for cats undergoing elective neutering procedures, and to explore any barriers to endotracheal intubation. The most common airway management for cat castrations was masks (36%) and for spays it was endotracheal tubes (94%). Statistical analysis showed significant associations between the airway management method used and the type of procedure (p < 0.01), cat castrations and the type of veterinary professional (p = 0.01), and the type of professional and confidence with intubation (p < 0.01). There was also a statistically
significant association between the number of years qualified and confidence with intubation (p < 0.01).
Keywords face masks, endotracheal tubes, supraglottic airway devices, airway management, intubation, feline, neutering
DOI: 10.56496/RGWF9084
To cite this article: Hamilton, L. and Batt-Williams, S. (2023) Airway management preferences and barriers to endotracheal intubation in elective feline neutering procedures Part 2: an investigation. VNJ Volume 38 (1) pp 40-49
To access this article click on one of the following links: