ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Front of neck access: A survey among anesthetists and surgeons.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of a semi-structured briefing on the management of adverse events in anesthesiology: a randomized pilot study.BMC anesthesiology · 2019Trial
- Airway management equipment and practice: time to optimise institutional, team, and personal preparedness.British journal of anaesthesia · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsEmergency front of neck access (FONA) is the final step in a Can't Intubate-Can't Oxygenate (CICO) scenario. In view of maintaining simplicity and promoting standardized training, the 2015 Difficult Airway Society guidelines recommend surgical cricothyroidotomy using scalpel, bougie, and tube (SBT) as the preferred technique. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe undertook a survey over a 2-week period to evaluate the knowledge and training, preferred rescue technique, and confidence in performing the SBT technique. Data were collected from both anesthetists and surgeons.
resultsOne hundred and eighty-nine responses were collected across four hospitals in the United Kingdom. The majority of participants were anesthetists (55%). One hundred and eleven (59%) respondents were aware of the national guidelines (96.2% among anesthetists and 12.9% among surgeons). Only 71 (37.6%) respondents indicated that they had formal FONA training within the last one year. Seventy-five anesthetists (72.8%) knew that SBT equipment was readily available in their department, while most surgeons (81.2%) did not know what equipment available. One hundred and five (55.5%) respondents were confident in performing surgical cricothyroidotomy in a situation where the membrane was palpable and only in 33 (17.5%) where the cricothyroid membrane was not palpable.
conclusionThis survey has demonstrated that despite evidence of good training for anesthetists in FONA, there are still shortfalls in the training and knowledge of our surgical colleagues. In an emergency, surgeons may be required to assist or secure an airway in a CICO situation. Regular multidisciplinary training of all clinicians working with anesthetized patients should be encouraged and supported.
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.