Trial reportTrials2012
Effectiveness of cricoid pressure in preventing gastric aspiration during rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and risks of cricoid pressure during rapid sequence induction for endotracheal intubation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- The Knowledge of Health Professionals About the Application of Cricoid Pressure in a Low-Income Country: A Single-Center Survey Study.International journal of general medicine · 2021Article
- Audit on Current Practice of Rapid Sequence Induction and Intubation of Anesthesia in the University of Gondar Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia, 2018.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCricoid pressure is considered to be the gold standard means of preventing aspiration of gastric content during Rapid Sequence Intubation (RSI). Its effectiveness has only been demonstrated in cadaveric studies and case reports. No randomised controlled trials comparing the incidence of gastric aspiration following emergent RSI, with or without cricoid pressure, have been performed. If improperly applied, cricoid pressure increases risk to the patient. The clinical significance of aspiration in the emergency department is unknown. This randomised controlled trial aims to; 1. Compare the application of the 'ideal" amount of force (30 - 40 newtons) to standard, unmeasured cricoid pressure and 2. Determine the incidence of clinically defined aspiration syndromes following RSI using a fibrinogen degradation assay previously described. METHODS/
design212 patients requiring emergency intubation will be randomly allocated to either control (unmeasured cricoid pressure) or intervention groups (30 - 40 newtons cricoid pressure). The primary outcome is the rate of aspiration of gastric contents (determined by pepsin detection in the oropharyngeal/tracheal aspirates or treatment for aspiration pneumonitis up to 28 days post-intubation). Secondary outcomes are; correlation between aspiration and lowest pre-intubation Glasgow Coma Score, the relationship between detection of pepsin in trachea and development of aspiration syndromes, complications associated with intubation and grade of the view on direct largyngoscopy. DISCUSSION: The benefits and risks of cricoid pressure application will be scrutinised by comparison of the incidence of aspiration and difficult or failed intubations in each group. The role of cricoid pressure in RSI in the emergency department and the use of a pepsin detection as a predictor of clinical aspiration will be evaluated.
trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12611000587909.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.