Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36060172›Full record

ReviewJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology2022

Prone cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Relevance in current times.

Nidhi Bhatia, Sandhya Yaddanapudi, Ashish S Aditya

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Nidhi BhatiaDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
Sandhya YaddanapudiDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
Ashish S AdityaDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The most common and recommended position for performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is the supine position. However, clinicians may encounter situations when patients suffer cardiac arrest in prone position. Prone CPR has been described previously in a number of settings, most commonly intraoperative. In the current COVID-19 era, with more patients being nursed in prone position, an increase in the incidence of cardiac arrests requiring prone CPR is expected. Hence most of the resuscitation guidelines have made prone CPR a vital component of their recommendations. To date, most of our health-care workers have limited knowledge about prone resuscitation and the literature surrounding it. Nonetheless, with the current evidence at hand, it seems to be a reliable method of providing resuscitation and all health-care workers should be well versed with it. Thus, the goal of this narrative review is to try and fill the gaps in our knowledge about prone CPR. Literature search was done on PubMed, Medline, EMBASE using keywords 'CPR', 'Resuscitation', 'Prone Position', 'Prone', 'Prone CPR'.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary resuscitationprone cardiac arrestprone CPR

Identifiers

PMID36060172
PMCPMC9438830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.