Which statement about quantitative waveform capnography is true in ACLS context?

Which statement about quantitative waveform capnography is true in ACLS context?

• A. Class II recommendation for ET tube
• B. Unsuitable for supraglottic airways
• C. Used in conjunction with physical examination to determine proper placement of an advanced airway
• D. All of the above

Answer: (C)

Quantitative waveform capnography provides real-time CO2 readings and a continuous waveform that confirms ventilation through an airway. In ACLS practice, it is used together with physical examination findings (like chest rise and auscultation) to verify proper placement of an advanced airway. The CO2 waveform indicates tracheal placement when present, and changes or absence can signal misplacement or tube dislodgement, making it a key confirmatory tool rather than a sole check. It can also be used to monitor ventilation with supraglottic airway devices, so saying it’s unsuitable for those devices isn’t accurate. Additionally, guidelines treat capnography for airway confirmation as a standard, not a lower-level Class II recommendation, so that statement isn’t correct.

Quantitative waveform capnography provides real-time CO2 readings and a continuous waveform that confirms ventilation through an airway. In ACLS practice, it is used together with physical examination findings (like chest rise and auscultation) to verify proper placement of an advanced airway. The CO2 waveform indicates tracheal placement when present, and changes or absence can signal misplacement or tube dislodgement, making it a key confirmatory tool rather than a sole check. It can also be used to monitor ventilation with supraglottic airway devices, so saying it’s unsuitable for those devices isn’t accurate. Additionally, guidelines treat capnography for airway confirmation as a standard, not a lower-level Class II recommendation, so that statement isn’t correct.