Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30678655›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2019

The influence of different patient positions during rapid induction with severe regurgitation on the volume of aspirate and time to intubation: a prospective randomised manikin simulation study.

Michael St Pierre, Frederick Krischke, Bjoern Luetcke, Joachim Schmidt

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. SAFE anaesthesia for patients at risk of pulmonary aspiration: A nationwide survey.European journal of anaesthesiology and intensive care · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael St PierreAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. michael.st.pierre@kfa.imed.uni-erlangen.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6263-5261
Frederick KrischkeAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Bjoern LuetckeAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Joachim SchmidtAnästhesiologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Krankenhaustrasse 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Universitätsklinikum Erlangen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAspiration is a main contributor to morbidity and mortality in anaesthesia. The ideal patient positioning for rapid sequence induction remains controversial. A head-down tilt and full cervical spine extension (Sellick) might prevent aspiration but at the same time compromise airway management. We aimed to determine the influence of three different positions during induction of general anaesthesia on the volume of aspirate and on participants' airway management.

methodsEighty-four anaesthetic trainees and consultants participated in a prospective randomised simulation study. Anaesthesia was induced in reverse Trendelenburg position (+ 15°) in a manikin capable of dynamic fluid regurgitation. Participants were randomised to change to Trendelenburg position (- 15°) a) as soon as regurgitation was noticed, b) as soon as 'patient' had been anaesthetised, and c) as soon as 'patient' had been anaesthetised and with full cervical spine extension (Sellick). Primary endpoints were the aspirated volume and the time to intubation. Secondary endpoints were ratings of the laryngoscopic view and the intubation situation (0-100 mm).

resultsCombining head-down tilt with Sellick position significantly reduced aspiration (p < 0.005). Median time to intubate was longer in Sellick position (15 s [8-30]) as compared with the head in sniffing position (10 s [8-12.5]; p < 0.05). Participants found laryngoscopy more difficult in Sellick position (39.3 ± 27.9 mm) as compared with the sniffing position (23.1 ± 22.1 mm; p < 0.05). Both head-down tilt intubation situations were considered equally difficult: 34.8 ± 24.6 mm (Sniffing) vs. 44.2 ± 23.1 mm (Sellick; p = n.s).

conclusionsIn a simulated setting, using a manikin-based simulator capable of fluid regurgitation, a - 15° head-down tilt with Sellick position reduced the amount of aspirated fluid but increased the difficulty in visualising the vocal cords and prolonged the time taken to intubate. Assessing the airway management in the identical position in healthy patients without risk of aspiration might be a promising next step to take.

Indexed as

Patient PositioningAdultAirway ManagementAnesthesia, GeneralAnesthesiologyFemaleHead-Down TiltHumansIntubation, IntratrachealLaryngoscopesLaryngoscopyMaleManikinsProspective StudiesVomitingAirway managementAspirationPatient safetyRapid sequence inductionSimulation

Identifiers

PMID30678655
PMCPMC6346548
OpenAlexW2941209821

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.