ArticleHead & neck2020
Tracheostomy intervention in intubated COVID positive patients: A survey of current clinical practice among ENT surgeons.
Article in Head & neck, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Factors of Requiring Tracheostomy in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Analysis of Intubated Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A safer and more practical tracheotomy in invasive mechanical ventilated patients with COVID-19: A quality improvement study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Tracheotomies in COVID-19 Patients: Protocols and Outcomes.Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2021Article
- Tracheostomy for COVID-19 respiratory failure: timing, ventilatory characteristics, and outcomes.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Article
- Clinical features and respiratory pathophysiology of COVID-19 patients ventilated in the prone position: a cohort study.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2021Observational
- Tracheostomy intervention in intubated COVID positive patients: A survey of current clinical practice among ENT surgeons.Head & neck · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an unprecedented need for critical care intervention. Prolonged intubation and mechanical ventilation has resulted in the need for tracheostomy in some patients. The purpose of this international survey was to assess optimal timing, technique and outcome for this intervention.
methodsAn online survey was generated. Otorhinolaryngologists from both the United Kingdom and Abroad were polled with regards to their experience of tracheostomy in COVID-19 positive ventilated patients.
resultsThe survey was completed by 50 respondents from 16 nations. The number of ventilated patients totalled 3403, on average 9.7% required a tracheostomy. This was on average performed on day 14 following intubation. The majority of patients were successfully weaned (mean 7.4 days following tracheostomy).
conclusionThe results of this brief survey suggest that tracheostomy is of benefit in selected patients. There was insufficient data to suggest improved outcomes with either percutaneous vs an open surgical technique.
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.