Observational studyJournal of anesthesia2020
Prediction of failed facemask ventilation: new scoring system for difficult airway.
Observational study in Journal of anesthesia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pre-operative three-dimensional face scans for predicting difficult facemask ventilation: a prospective development study.Anaesthesia · 2026Observational
- Association between upper airway computed tomography measurement parameters and mask ventilation in patients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Can a new scoring system reliably predict failed facemask ventilation?Journal of anesthesia · 2020Article
- A new scoring system to predict failed facemask ventilation: a reply to the letter of Professor Priebe.Journal of anesthesia · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe previously have shown that there was a strong correlation between failed facemask ventilation, failed ventilation through a supraglottic airway, and difficult tracheal intubation. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether or not an established method to predict difficult ventilation through a supraglottic airway was also useful for predicting failed facemask ventilation.
methodsThis was a single-center, retrospective observational study. We studied 28,081 anesthetized patients in whom ventilation through a facemask, and supraglottic airway was attempted as the initial technique during induction of anesthesia, between May 2011 and March 2016. For each patient, the score which had been validated to be useful for predicting difficult ventilation through a supraglottic airway was calculated. The score ranged between 0 and 7 points, and we defined a low risk when the score was 0-3, and a high risk when the score was 4-7. To measure and compare the predictive accuracy of the score, we generated a receiver operating characteristic curve and compared the area under the curve (AUC).
resultsThe incidence of failed facemask ventilation was significantly higher in patients with high-risk predictive score than in patients with low-risk predictive score [0.38% vs 0.056%, odds ratio 6.8 (95% CI 2.6-18.1, p value = 0.002)], and the sensitivity of the score was 25%, while the specificity was 95%, with a negative predictive value of 99%. The AUC of the score was 0.71 (95% CI 0.58-0.83).
conclusionsThe predictive score for difficult ventilation through a supraglottic airway is also useful to predict failed facemask ventilation.
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.