Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16741600›Full record

ReviewDer Anaesthesist2006

[Awareness: a problem in paediatric anaesthesia?].

M Jöhr

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Paediatric pharmacokinetics: key considerations.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015
    Review
  3. Awareness under general anesthesia.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2011
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

M JöhrInstitut für Anästhesie, Kantonsspital, 6000 Luzern 16, Schweiz. joehrmartin@bluewin.ch
Luzerner Kantonsspital · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intraoperative awareness has been reported to occur in 0.8-5.0% of paediatric patients undergoing anaesthesia and, therefore, seems to be more common than in adults (incidence 0.1-0.2%). In adult patients, the consequences of intraoperative awareness are well known and can be severe, in children, however, they have not yet been adequately studied. The causes for intraoperative awareness can be divided into three broad categories: First, no or only a light anaesthetic is given on purpose, second, an insufficient dose of an anaesthetic is given inadvertently, third, there is equipment malfunction or the anaesthesiologist makes an error. Unfortunately, especially in young children, painful interventions are still performed without adequate analgesia, e.g. awake intubation or fracture manipulation under midazolam sedation alone. The key issue is, however, that pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics change enormously from the 500 g preterm baby to the adolescent patient. Adequate dosing is much more difficult in paediatric patients compared to standard adult surgical patients. Solid knowledge of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of commonly used drugs in different paediatric age groups, as well as aiming for perfection in daily care will help to reduce the incidence of awareness. Methods for monitoring the depth of hypnosis, e.g. the bispectral index, will be used increasingly, at least in children above 1 year of age. In addition to clinical parameters, they will hopefully help to further reduce the incidence of intraoperative awareness.

Indexed as

AwarenessAdultAnesthesiaAnestheticsChildElectroencephalographyEquipment FailureHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsMonitoring, IntraoperativePainAnesthetics

Identifiers

PMID16741600
OpenAlexW13002370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.