Trial reportJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2016
Assessment of endotracheal tube placement in newborn infants: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Realtime and noninvasive assessment of endotracheal tube displacement using near-infrared and visible cameras.Biomedical optics express · 2024Article
- [Airway management in neonates and infants : Recommendations according to the ESAIC/BJA guidelines].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2024Article
- Article
- [Newborn resuscitation and support of transition of infants at birth].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInternational resuscitation guidelines recommend clinical assessment and exhaled CO2 to confirm tube placement immediately after intubation. However, exhaled CO2 devices can display false negative results. In comparison, any respiratory function monitor can be used to measure and display gas flow in and out of an endotracheal tube. However, neither method has been examined in detail. We hypothesized that a flow sensor would improve the assessment of tracheal vs esophageal tube placement in neonates with a higher success rate and a shorter time to tube placement confirmation when compared with the use of a quantitative end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) detector. STUDY
designBetween December 2013 and September 2014, preterm and term infants requiring endotracheal intubation were eligible for inclusion and randomly allocated to either ETCO2 ('ETCO2 group') or flow sensor ('flow sensor group'). All infants were analyzed according to their group at randomization (that is, analysis was by intention-to-treat).
resultDuring the study period, a total of 110 infants (n=55 for each group) were randomized. Successful endotracheal tube placements were correctly identified in 100% of cases by the flow sensor compared with 72% of cases with the ETCO2 detector within 10 inflations (P<0.05). The median (interquartile range) number of inflations needed to identify successful tube placement was significantly lower in the flow sensor group with 2 (1 to 3) inflations vs 8 (6 to 10) inflations with the ETCO2 detector (P<0.001).
conclusionA flow sensor would improve the assessment of successful endotracheal tube placement with a higher success rate and a shorter time compared with an ETCO2 detector.
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.