Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Prakash Kannan Loganathan, Dr Vrinda Nair
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2026. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.Background: A wide range of neonatal-specific video laryngoscopes (VLs) are now available, each offering unique design features. Understanding these differences is essential to support training and optimise clinical use in neonatal airway management. Objective: To compare the physical and functional characteristics of four commonly used neonatal VLs and assess user experience. Methods: In this observational study, four VL systems—C-MAC, GlideScope, InfantView and NeoView were evaluated. A technical comparison of blade design and dimensions was performed across available blade sizes, alongside a conventional Miller blade. Medical professionals attending a neonatal airway workshop then used each device on neonatal manikins and rated their experience using a 4-point scale across six domains: ease of use, airway visualisation, ease of intubation, image quality, blade size and blade design. Results: A total of 23 participants with varied clinical backgrounds completed the evaluation. While 65% routinely performed neonatal intubations, 80% reported fewer than 10 intubations annually and 65% preferred conventional laryngoscopy. Following the trial, most participants favoured the C-MAC and NeoView VLs, and GlideScope was perceived to mimic conventional laryngoscope. The NeoView and C-MAC devices had the shortest distance between the camera and the distal blade tip. All VLs supported video and image capture. NeoView and GlideScope used disposable blades, while others employed reusable blades. Conclusions: This study provides a systematic comparison of the physical features and user preferences for commonly available neonatal VLs. These insights can guide equipment selection, inform training programmes and promote safer neonatal airway management.
Author(s): Kannan Loganathan P, Yasmeen T, Nair V, O'Shea J
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Archives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal and Neonatal Edition
Year: 2026
Pages: Epub ahead of print
Online publication date: 27/03/2026
Acceptance date: 13/02/2026
Date deposited: 01/06/2026
ISSN (print): 1359-2998
ISSN (electronic): 1468-2052
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
URL: https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2025-329515
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2025-329515
Data Access Statement: Data are available upon reasonable request. Deidentified individual participant data will be made available, in addition to study protocols, the statistical analysis plan and the consent form. The data will be made available upon publication to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal and research ethics board approval. Proposals should be submitted to pkannanloganathan@nhs.net.
PubMed id: 41895814
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
