Methods: Ten novice operators inserted each reinforced LMA in a manikin, 3 times in random order (9 insertions in total) and the times required for insertion were measured. Participants were then asked to rate the ease of insertion of each device using the 100 mm VAS (from 0 mm = extremely easy to 100 mm = extremely difficult).
Results: Insertion time was significantly shorter with the Ambu® AuraFlex™ (13.9±4.1 s; P<0.01) and the LMA Flexible™ Single (14.4±3.8 s; P<0.01) compared with the LMA Flexible™ (18.6±5.3 s). With regard to the ease of insertion as rated using the 100-mm VAS, the novice operators rated the Ambu® AuraFlex™ (median, 17 mm [10th-90th percentile, 12-37 mm]; P<0.01) as being significantly easier compared with the LMA Flexible™ (62 [44-78] mm). However, the LMA Flexible™ Single (31 [14-59] mm; P=0.056) was not significantly different as compared to the LMA Flexible™.
Conclusions: The Ambu® AuraFlex™ and the LMA Flexible™ Single each appear to possess advantages over the LMA Flexible™. In particular, the Ambu® AuraFlex™ seems overall more favorable in terms of ease and time to insertion for novice operators.