Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32033568›Full record

SynthesisScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2020

Comparison of adverse events between video and direct laryngoscopes for tracheal intubations in emergency department and ICU patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jia Jiang, Na Kang, Bo Li, An-Shi Wu, Fu-Shan Xue

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2020. 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
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Impact of aerosol box on intubation during COVID-19: a simulation study of normal and difficult airways.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2021
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. [Adult advanced life support].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021
    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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jia JiangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100020, China.
Na KangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100020, China.
Bo LiBeijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100010, China.
An-Shi WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100020, China.
Fu-Shan XueDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, China. xuefushan@aliyun.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1028-6036
Capital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to determine whether video laryngoscope (VL) compared with direct laryngoscope (DL) could reduce the occurrence of adverse events associated with tracheal intubation in the emergency and ICU patients.

methodsThe current issue of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science (from database inception to October 30, 2018) were searched. The RCTs, quasi-RCTs, observational studies comparing VL and DL for tracheal intubation in emergency or ICU patients and reporting the rates of adverse events were included. The primary outcome was the rate of esophageal intubation (EI). Review Manager 5.3 software was used to perform the pooled analysis and assess the risk of bias for each eligible RCT. The ACROBAT-NRSi Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was applied to assess the risk of bias for each eligible observational study.

resultsTwenty-three studies (13,117 patients) were included in the review for data extraction. Pooled analysis showed a lower rate of EI by using VL (relative risk [RR], 0.24; P < 0.01; high-quality evidence for RCTs and very low-quality evidence for observational studies). Subgroup analyses based on the type of studies, whether a cardiopulmonary resuscitation study, or operators' expertise showed a similar lower rate of EI by using VL compared with DL in all subgroups (P < 0.01) except for experienced operators (RR, 0.44; P = 0.09). There were no significant differences between devices for other adverse events (P > 0.05), except for a lower incidence of hypoxemia when intubation was performed with VL by inexperienced operators (P = 0.03).

conclusionsBased on the results of this analysis, we conclude that compared with DL, VL can reduce the risk of EI during tracheal intubation in the emergency and ICU patients, but does not provide significant benefits on other adverse events associated with tracheal intubation.

Indexed as

Intubation, IntratrachealLaryngoscopesVideo RecordingEmergency Service, HospitalEsophagusHumansIntensive Care UnitsLaryngoscopyAirway managementLaryngoscopeObservational studyRandomized controlled trialTracheal intubation

Identifiers

PMID32033568
PMCPMC7006069
OpenAlexW3012614548

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.