Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34454416›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2021

The COVID-19 pandemic: the effect on airway Management in non-COVID emergency patients.

Onlak Ruangsomboon, Phetsinee Boonmee, Akarin Nimmannit

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Impact of COVID-19 on the Clinical Practices, Working Environment, and Social Life of Intensivists in Non-COVID ICU.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Onlak RuangsomboonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand. doctor.mo@yahoo.com.
Phetsinee BoonmeeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand.
Akarin NimmannitDepartment of Research, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand.
Siriraj Hospital · THMahidol University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 outbreak, healthcare providers might have avoided droplet/aerosol-generating procedures, such as non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) due to the concern of themselves being infected. We hypothesized that this change of practice could have also occurred to other non-COVID-infected patients in the Emergency Department (ED).

methodsA retrospective analytic study was conducted in the ED of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, including adult patients presenting with signs and symptoms of respiratory distress between 1 March and 30 April 2020 (the COVID period). A comparison group using the same inclusion criteria was retrieved from 1 March to 30 April 2019 (the pre-COVID period). The primary outcome was rate of NIV and HFNC use. The secondary outcomes were rate of intubation, failure of NIV and HFNC, complications, and mortality.

resultsA total of 360 and 333 patients were included during the pre-COVID and COVID periods, respectively. After adjusting for baseline differences, patients in the COVID period were less likely to receive either NIV or HFNC than the pre-COVID period (adjusted OR 0.52 [95%CI 0.29-0.92]). Overall, intubation rate was similar between the two study periods. However, patients in respiratory distress with pulmonary edema had a relatively higher intubation rate in the COVID period. There were higher failure rates of NIV and HFNC, more infectious complications, and a higher rate of mortality in the pre-COVID period.

conclusionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall usage of NIV and HFNC in emergency non-COVID patients decreased. Although not affecting the overall intubation rate, this change of practice could have affected some groups of patients. Therefore, treatment decisions based on a balance between the benefits to the patients and the safety of healthcare providers should be made.

Indexed as

COVID-19Emergency Service, HospitalNoninvasive VentilationRespiratory InsufficiencyAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOxygen Inhalation TherapyPandemicsRetrospective StudiesThailandAirway managementCOVID-19High-flow nasal cannulaNon-invasive ventilation

Identifiers

PMID34454416
PMCPMC8397873
OpenAlexW3198453032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.