Still on the topic of paramedics and lack of intubation success begun in Paramedic = Intubation I , Paramedic = Intubation II , and Paramedic = Intubation III . What if the numbers in the research are misleading? They are misleading. That is one of the reasons I write so much about them. Look at the many ways we might describe an intubation attempt: Any opening of the intubation kit. Any attempt to visualize the airway, even if there is no use of a laryngoscope or endotracheal tube. Any insertion of the laryngoscope in an attempt to visualize the airway, even if just to determine if it is appropriate to attempt to intubate. Any airway use (BVM, LMA, CombiTube, King LT, crichothyrotomy, endotracheal tube), even if intubation was never attempted. We do not even remotely have agreement about what is an attempt at intubation. For example, I arrive to find a patient supine with a patent airway, but depressed respirations. I initiate BVM ventilation while assessing for other potential life threats. My partner gets a history, list of medications, et cetera. The rest of the assessment shows a cachectic elderly male with no signs of trauma, supine on the floor. Ventilation by BVM is adequate with good chest rise and no abdominal distention. I transfer BVM to my BLS partner. My partner ventilates the patient successfully, while we move the patient to the ambulance. Even though this patient has plenty of whiskers and dentures, which we removed, he is not showing any signs of any complications that would indicate problems with ventilation. En route, I start an IV and draw bloods, back when the hospitals would accept our blood draws. Now I don’t start an IV unless I anticipate a specific need.

Original Source of Paramedic = Intubation IV