Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30530463›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2018

Endotracheal Intubation Among the Critically Ill: Protocol for a Multicenter, Observational, Prospective Study.

Nathan Smischney, Rahul Kashyap, Mohamed Seisa, Darrell Schroeder, Daniel Diedrich

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02508948 (Current State of Endotracheal Intubation Among the Critically Ill and Exploring Risk Factors for Immediate Complications of Endotracheal Intubation), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02508948 completednot on this map

Current State of Endotracheal Intubation Among the Critically Ill and Exploring Risk Factors for Immediate Complications of Endotracheal Intubation: a Prospective, Observational Multi-center Study (HEMAIR)

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorMayo ClinicRan2015 to 2019Enrolled1,288ConditionsTracheal Intubation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
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

5 authors.

Nathan Smischney *Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1051-098X
Rahul Kashyap *Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4383-3411
Mohamed Seisa *Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5179-4264
Darrell Schroeder *Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8591-5936
Daniel Diedrich *Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3688-3581

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndotracheal intubation can occur in up to 60% of critically ill patients. Despite the frequency with which endotracheal intubation occurs, the current practice is largely unknown. This is relevant, as advances in airway equipment (ie, video laryngoscopes) have become more prevalent, leading to possible improvement of care delivered during this process. In addition to new devices, a greater emphasis on airway plans and choices in sedation have evolved, although the influence on patient morbidity and mortality is largely unknown.

objectiveThis study aims to derive and validate prediction models for immediate airway and hemodynamic complications of intensive care unit intubations.

methodsA multicenter, observational, prospective study of adult critically ill patients admitted to both medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) was conducted. Participating ICU sites were located throughout eight health and human services regions of the United States for which endotracheal intubation was needed. A steering committee composed of both anesthesia and pulmonary critical care physicians proposed a core set of data variables. These variables were incorporated into a data collection form to be used within the multiple, participating ICUs across the United States during the time of intubation. The data collection form consisted of two basic components, focusing on airway management and hemodynamic management. The form was generated using RedCap and distributed to the participating centers. Quality checks on the dataset were performed several times with each center, such that they arrived at less than 10% missing values for each data variable; the checks were subsequently entered into a database.

resultsThe study is currently undergoing data analysis. Results are expected in November 2018 with publication to follow thereafter. The study protocol has not yet undergone peer review by a funding body.

conclusionsThe overall goal of this multicenter prospective study is to develop a scoring system for peri-intubation, hemodynamic, and airway-related complications so we can stratify those patients at greatest risk for decompensation as a result of these complications. This will allow critical care physicians to be better prepared in addressing these occurrences and will allow them to improve the quality of care delivered to the critically ill.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02508948; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02508948 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73Oj6cTFu). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/11101.

Indexed as

airwayendotracheal intubationhemodynamicsintensive care unitmulti-centerprospective study

Identifiers

PMID30530463
PMCPMC6303735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.