Oesophageal malposition of an endotracheal tube is among the leading causes of anaesthesia incidents. While clinical manoeuvres for detection of tube malposition are unreliable, monitoring (i.e. capnography) can prevent such incidents. The problem is particularly important in prehospital care, where capnography is not (yet) widely available. We tested three devices used for differentiating oesophageal from endotracheal intubation: 1. Non-CO2-dependent Oesophageal Detector Device (ODD) as described by Pollard and Wee, 2. Semi-quantitative chemical disposable capnometer EasyCAP (Nellcor), 3. Non-quantitative infrared miniaturised capnometer MiniCAP (MSA). METHODS. 50 anaesthetised minipigs were intubated with a Magill tube. An identical additional tube was placed in the oesophagus. The cuffs of both tubes were inflated. Unexperienced personnel (students, laboratory technicians) were asked to determine the position of one of the tubes by using one of the devices according to the randomisation plan. The decision had to be taken within 30 s. Using the ODD, the proband first injected 100 ml air into the lung (or stomach) and then tried to aspirate the same volume. EasyCAP and MiniCAP were used according to manuals. RESULTS. Each device was used 25 times with a tracheal tube and 25 times with an oesophageal tube. All tube position identifications were correct. When ventilating the oesophagus/stomach for capnometric control, regurgitation into the tube occurred six times (five times with the EasyCAP and once with the MiniCAP). In these cases, the decision was based on this occurrence and not on the display of the device. While using the ODD no regurgitation occurred. CONCLUSION. These devices are useful for preclinical practice. According to the literature and our experience, the ODD is superior for the initial control of tube position, especially in cardiac arrest. Capnometry is needed, however, for continuous control of ventilation.