Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26170128›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2015

Capnography monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia: a systematic review protocol.

Aaron Conway, Clint Douglas, Joanna Sutherland

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Aaron ConwayInstitute of Health & Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, 4059, Australia. aaron.conway@qut.edu.au.
Clint DouglasSchool of Nursing, Institute of Health & Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus, Kelvin Grove, 4059, Queensland, Australia.
Joanna SutherlandCoffs Harbour Health Campus, New South Wales, Australia. Joanna.Sutherland@ncahs.health.nsw.gov.au.
Queensland University of Technology · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn important potential clinical benefit of using capnography monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is that this technology could improve patient safety by reducing serious sedation-related adverse events, such as death or permanent neurological disability, which are caused by inadequate oxygenation. The hypothesis is that earlier identification of respiratory depression using capnography leads to a change in clinical management that prevents hypoxaemia. As inadequate oxygenation/ventilation is the most common reason for injury associated with PSA, reducing episodes of hypoxaemia would indicate that using capnography would be safer than relying on standard monitoring alone. METHODS/

designThe primary objective of this review is to determine whether using capnography during PSA in the hospital setting improves patient safety by reducing the risk of hypoxaemia (defined as an arterial partial pressure of oxygen below 60 mmHg or percentage of haemoglobin that is saturated with oxygen [SpO(2)] less than 90 %). A secondary objective of this review is to determine whether changes in the clinical management of sedated patients are the mediating factor for any observed impact of capnography monitoring on the rate of hypoxaemia. The potential adverse effect of capnography monitoring that will be examined in this review is the rate of inadequate sedation. Electronic databases will be searched for parallel, crossover and cluster randomised controlled trials comparing the use of capnography with standard monitoring alone during PSA that is administered in the hospital setting. Studies that included patients who received general or regional anaesthesia will be excluded from the review. Non-randomised studies will be excluded. Screening, study selection and data extraction will be performed by two reviewers. The Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used to assign a judgment about the degree of risk. Meta-analyses will be performed if suitable. DISCUSSION: This review will synthesise the evidence on an important potential clinical benefit of capnography monitoring during PSA within hospital settings. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015023740.

Indexed as

AnalgesiaAnesthesiaCapnographyHumansHypoxiaMonitoring, PhysiologicSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID26170128
PMCPMC4499911
OpenAlexW1532867130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.