Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation: a Cochrane Systematic Review† S.R. Lewis, A.R. Butler, J. Parker, T.M. Cook, O.J. Schofield-Robinson, A.F. Smith British Journal of Anaesthesia Volume 119, Issue 3, Pages 369-383 (September 2017) DOI: 10.1093/bja/aex228 Copyright © 2017 The Author(s) Terms and Conditions
Fig 1 Flow chart of search strategy. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2017 119, 369-383DOI: (10.1093/bja/aex228) Copyright © 2017 The Author(s) Terms and Conditions
Fig 2 Risk of bias graph. Review authors' judgments about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2017 119, 369-383DOI: (10.1093/bja/aex228) Copyright © 2017 The Author(s) Terms and Conditions
Fig 3 Comparison: videolaryngoscope (experimental) vs Macintosh (control). Outcome: failed intubation. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2017 119, 369-383DOI: (10.1093/bja/aex228) Copyright © 2017 The Author(s) Terms and Conditions
Fig 4 Subgroup analysis. Comparison: videolaryngoscope vs Macintosh. Outcome: failed intubation by scope. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2017 119, 369-383DOI: (10.1093/bja/aex228) Copyright © 2017 The Author(s) Terms and Conditions
Fig 5 Subgroup analysis. Comparison: videolaryngoscope vs Macintosh. Outcome: failed intubation by airway difficulty. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2017 119, 369-383DOI: (10.1093/bja/aex228) Copyright © 2017 The Author(s) Terms and Conditions