ReviewDer Anaesthesist2016
[Risk management in anesthesia and critical care medicine].
Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Systematic risk management for a planned gas shutdown in the high-care facility of a university hospital].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2023Review
- [Practice of perioperative phantom limb pain prevention in Germany: a nationwide survey].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2022Article
- Do Digital Handover Checklists Influence the Clinical Outcome Parameters of Intensive Care Unit Patients? A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- [Impact assessment of inadequate hospital disaster management : Reflection based on a risk model].Der Anaesthesist · 2017Review
- [Diagnostic investigation in emergency medicine: Why case history is crucial].Der Anaesthesist · 2017Article
- [Full-scale simulation in German medical schools and anesthesia residency programs : Status quo].Der Anaesthesist · 2017Article
- [Aus "Fehler und Gefahren" wird "Patientensicherheit" und aus "Trends und Medizinökonomie" wird "Qualitätsmanagement und Medizinökonomie"].Der Anaesthesist · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Throughout its history, anesthesia and critical care medicine has experienced vast improvements to increase patient safety. Consequently, anesthesia has never been performed on such a high level as it is being performed today. As a result, we do not always fully perceive the risks involved in our daily activity. A survey performed in Swiss hospitals identified a total of 169 hot spots which endanger patient safety. It turned out that there is a complex variety of possible errors that can only be tackled through consistent implementation of a safety culture. The key elements to reduce complications are continuing staff education, algorithms and standard operating procedures (SOP), working according to the principles of crisis resource management (CRM) and last but not least the continuous work-up of mistakes identified by critical incident reporting systems.
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.