ArticleClinical and experimental emergency medicine2022
Use of HEAVEN criteria for predicting difficult intubation in the emergency department.
Article in Clinical and experimental emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Current trends in emergency airway management: a clinical review.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2024Article
- A Prospective Study Evaluating Gender Differences of Serious Outcomes through Difficult Airway Physiological Score (DAPS) in the Emergency Department.Critical care research and practice · 2024Article
- Torrential intraoral bleed in a mandibular arteriovenous malformation: Resuscitation under nonoperating room settings.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMost airway prediction tools only consider anatomical factors. The HEAVEN criteria incorporate both anatomical and physiological elements, but have never been studied in the emergency department. This study aimed to evaluate the association between HEAVEN criteria and intubation difficulty.
methodsWe conducted a prospective cross-sectional study from April 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021 in the emergency department of a tertiary public hospital. All patients requiring rapid-sequence or delayed-sequence intubation were included. Patients intubated during cardiopulmonary resuscitation were excluded. We enrolled 174 patients. Study endpoints were first pass success and intubation complications.
resultsThe presence of any HEAVEN criteria was associated with a decrease in the first pass success rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.43; P < 0.01). The anatomical challenge was the only criterion associated with first pass sucess (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05- 0.29; P < 0.01), whilst other criteria (hypoxemia, extremes of size, vomit/blood/fluid, exsanguination, and neck mobility) were not (P > 0.05). All anatomical factor criteria were associated with difficult airway view (P < 0.05). Intubation complications occurred more in the presence of hypoxemia (OR, 7.44; 95% CI, 2.82-19.63; P < 0.01) and vomit/blood/fluid (OR, 5.55; 95% CI, 2.39-12.92; P < 0.01).
conclusionAnatomical challenge in HEAVEN criteria can predict first pass success. All anatomical factors in HEAVEN criteria could predict difficult airway view and peri-intubation hypoxemia could be used to anticipate intubation complications. More validation studies are still needed to evaluate the use of HEAVEN criteria as a predictor tool for difficult airway.
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.