ArticleResuscitation plus2021
Neurological outcomes associated with prehospital advanced airway management in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to foreign body airway obstruction.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dispatcher Performance and Prehospital Outcomes in Telephone-Assisted Airway Management following Foreign Body Obstruction: A Cross-Sectional Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Global, regional, and national assessment of foreign body aspiration (1990-2021): novel insights into incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Impact of different medical direction policies on prehospital advanced airway management for out-of hospital cardiac arrest patients: A retrospective cohort study.Resuscitation plus · 2022Article
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
objectivesSeveral studies have examined the association between advanced airway management (AAM) and survival for arrest that is non-shockable, noncardiac in origin, or due to suffocation; however, the efficacy of prehospital AAM compared with no AAM following foreign body removal by emergency medical services (EMS) has not been examined. We aimed to compare neurological outcomes in patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) due to foreign body airway obstruction (FBAO) managed with and without AAM after foreign body removal.
methodsThis retrospective observational cohort study used all emergency transportation data of Japan and the All-Japan Utstein Registry. We included patients with OHCA aged ≥18 years undergoing resuscitation and removal of airway foreign bodies by EMS from January 2015 to December 2017. The exposure of interest was prehospital AAM by EMS after foreign body removal, and the primary outcome was a favorable neurological outcome at hospital discharge (i.e., a cerebral performance category of 1-2).
resultsOverall, 329,098 adults had OHCAs and 23,060 had foreign bodies removed from their airways; 3681 adult patients met our eligibility criteria and were divided as: AAM (2045) and non-AAM (1636) groups. Propensity score matching resulted in 1210 matched pairs with balanced baseline characteristics between the groups. The rate of favorable neurological outcome was significantly lower in the AAM group than in the non-AAM group (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19-0.62). However, survival was not significantly different between the two groups (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.84-1.37).
conclusionsWe have not demonstrated the benefit of AAM for patients with OHCA due to FBAO. Further study will be required to confirm the efficacy of AAM for those patients.
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.