ArticleJournal of acute medicine2017
Adherence to Evidence-Base Endotracheal Intubation Practice Patterns by Intensivists and Emergency Department Physicians.
Article in Journal of acute medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Airway management in trauma patients: A seven-year review of emergency department intubations.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Novel Variation in the External Carotid Artery: Implications for Clinical and Surgical Practice.Cureus · 2024Article
- Drug delivery systems for wound healing treatment of upper airway injury.Expert opinion on drug delivery · 2024Review
- Problems Related to Endotracheal Intubation as an Input for the Design of a New Endotracheal Tube.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Review
- Management of the Emergency Airway: Clinical Considerations and Practical Strategies for Resident Physicians.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndotracheal intubation outside the operating room (OR) is mainly performed by intensive care (IC) physicians and emergency department (ED) physicians. We hypothesized that difference in practice patterns exists between these two groups of physicians.
methodsA retrospective chart review was performed on all endotracheal intubations that were performed out of OR over a fi ve year period at our health care facility. Practice patterns of IC and ED physicians were compared regarding use of (a) video laryngoscopy, (b) paralytic agents, (c) waveform capnography, and (d) use of larger size of endotracheal tube (internal diameter ≥ 8 mm).
resultsA total of 201 patients underwent out of OR intubations over a 5 year period. IC physicians used more often than ED physicians video laryngoscopy (67% vs. 49%; p = 0.008), waveform capnography (99% vs. 86%; p = 0.001) and larger size endotracheal tubes (95% vs. 60%; p < 0.001). Conversely, paralytic agents were used less frequently by IC than ED physicians (12% vs. 51%; p < 0.001). The success of fi rst intubation attempt was higher by IC than ED physicians (82% vs. 67%; p = 0.018).
conclusionsIC physicians more often adhered to currently considered preferable practices for endotracheal intubation than ED physicians in this single center retrospective study. Although larger scale studies are needed to unveil the effects of different practice patterns on short and long term outcomes, the present study identifi es opportunity to bridge practice gaps that could lead to improved outcomes.
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.