Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31900637›Full record

ArticleAnnals of intensive care2020

Nationwide survey on training and device utilization during tracheal intubation in French intensive care units.

M Martin, P Decamps, A Seguin, C Garret, L Crosby, O Zambon, A F Miailhe, E Canet, J Reignier, J B Lascarrou and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of intensive care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

M MartinService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
P DecampsService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
A SeguinService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
C GarretService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
L CrosbyService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
O ZambonService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
A F MiailheService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
E CanetService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
J ReignierService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France.
J B LascarrouService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, 44093, Nantes Cedex 9, France. jeanbaptiste.lascarrou@chu-nantes.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3706-078X
Intubation Practices Survey Group
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRImation (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntubation is a lifesaving procedure that is often performed in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, but leads to serious adverse events in 20-40% of cases. Recent trials aimed to provide guidance about which medications, devices, and modalities maximize patient safety. Videolaryngoscopes are being offered in an increasing range of options and used in broadening indications (from difficult to unremarkable intubation). The objective of this study was to describe intubation practices and device availability in French ICUs. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted an online nationwide survey by emailing an anonymous 26-item questionnaire to physicians in French ICUs. A single questionnaire was sent to either the head or the intubation expert at each ICU.

resultsOf 257 ICUs, 180 (70%) returned the completed questionnaire. The results showed that 43% of intubators were not fully proficient in intubation; among them, 18.8% had no intubation training or had received only basic training (lectures and observation at the bedside). Among the participating ICUs, 94.4% had a difficult intubation trolley, 74.5% an intubation protocol, 92.2% a capnography device (used routinely to check tube position in 69.3% of ICUs having the device), 91.6% a laryngeal mask, 97.2% front-of-neck access capabilities, and 76.6% a videolaryngoscope. In case of difficult intubation, 85.6% of ICUs used a bougie (154/180) and 7.8% switched to a videolaryngoscope (14/180). Use of a videolaryngoscope was reserved for difficult intubation in 84% of ICUs (154/180). Having a videolaryngoscope was significantly associated with having an intubation protocol (P = 0.043) and using capnography (P = 0.02). Airtraq

conclusionNearly half the intubators in French ICUs are not fully proficient with OTI. Access to modern training methods such as simulation is inadequate. Most ICUs own a videolaryngoscope, but reserve it for difficult intubations.

Indexed as

AirwayEndotracheal intubationEquipmentIntensive care unitSurveyTrainingVideolaryngoscope

Identifiers

PMID31900637
PMCPMC6942097
OpenAlexW3000185274

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.