ArticleCJEM2021
A survey of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) program implementation in Canadian trauma centres.
Article in CJEM, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine how many Level 1 and Level 2 trauma centres in Canada have implemented a resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) program, and to identify facilitators and barriers to successful implementation of REBOA programs.
methodsAn electronic survey was developed and administered in November 2019 (updated in July 2021) via email to directors at all 32 Level 1 and Level 2 trauma centres across Canada, and to the medical director in PEI (no Level 1 or Level 2 capacity). Survey responses were supplemented by an online search in PubMed and the grey literature. Responses were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics including frequencies and proportions.
resultsWe received responses from directors at 22 sites (17 Level 1 trauma centres, 4 Level 2 trauma centres, PEI) for a response rate of 66.7%. There are 6 Level 1 trauma centres with REBOA programs; all were implemented between 2017 and 2019. One additional Level 1 trauma centre that did not respond was found to have a REBOA program; thus, 21.9% (7/32) of Canadian Level 1 and Level 2 trauma centres have an existing REBOA program. These programs are located in three provinces (British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec). Five other centres are planning on implementing a REBOA program in the next 2 years. The number of REBOA cases performed ranged from 0 to 30 (median 2). Factors contributing most to successful program implementation were having physician champions and patient populations with sufficient REBOA candidates, while cost and lack of expertise were the greatest barriers identified.
conclusionAs of July 2021, 21.9% (7/32) of Canadian Level 1 and Level 2 trauma centres have a REBOA program. Physician champions and a patient population with sufficient numbers of REBOA candidates were the most important factors contributing to successful implementation of these programs.
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.