Trial reportCJEM2021
Does utilization of an intubation safety checklist reduce omissions during simulated resuscitation scenarios: a multi-center randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in CJEM, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Implementing the Safe Airway Checklist (SAC) at the emergency department of a major teaching hospital in Rwanda: A pre- and post-intervention study.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2025Article
- Getting ON-TRAC, a team-centred design study of a reflexivity aid to support resuscitation teams' information sharing.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2025Article
- Use of in situ simulation to improve team performance and utilization of a rapid sequence intubation checklist.AEM education and training · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesChecklists have been used to decrease adverse events associated with medical procedures. Simulation provides a safe setting in which to evaluate a new checklist. The objective of this study was to determine if the use of a novel peri-intubation checklist would decrease practitioners' rates of omission of tasks during simulated airway management scenarios.
methodsFifty-four emergency medicine (EM) practitioners from two academic centers were randomized to either their usual approach or use of our checklist, then completed three simulated airway management scenarios. A minimum of two assessors documented the number of tasks omitted and the time until definitive airway management. Discrepancies between assessors were resolved by single assessor video review. Participants also completed a post-simulation survey.
resultsThe average percentage of omitted tasks over three scenarios was 45.7% in the control group (n = 25) and 13.5% in the checklist group (n = 29)-an absolute difference of 32.2% (95% CI 27.8, 36.6%). Time to definitive airway management was longer in the checklist group in the first two of three scenarios (difference of 110.0 s, 95% CI 55.0 to 167.0; 83.0 s, 95% CI 35.0 to 128.0; and 36.0 s, 95% CI -18.0 to 98.0 respectively).
conclusionsIn this dual-center, randomized controlled trial, use of an airway checklist in a simulated setting significantly decreased the number of important airway tasks omitted by EM practitioners, but increased time to definitive airway management.
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.