ArticleTurkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation2022
A Survey of Current Practices and Adherence to Coronavirus Disease Airway Management Guidelines Among Frontline Healthcare Professionals in a Resource-Limited Country.
Article in Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 2022. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Airway Management in the ICU and Emergency Department in Resource-Limited Settings.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has brought anaesthesiologists, intensive care and emergency physicians to the forefront due to their airway management skills. The aim of survey was to determine current practice trends in COVID-19 airway management among frontline healthcare professionals of Pakistan and their adherence to standard principles proposed by most consensus guidelines.
methodsAn online questionnaire was designed based on consensus guidelines from international societies. We contacted consultants and trainees nationwide working in anaesthesia, intensive care, and emergency departments through emails, phone calls, and social media platforms.
resultsA total of 285 individuals participated in this cross-sectional descriptive study. Intubations were largely performed by anaesthetists followed by emergency physicians. Deteriorating respiratory failure (89%) was the most frequent indication. Availability of trained staff, use of intubation checklist, limited staff presence during intubation, and use of appropriate personal protective equipment were positive findings. One-third reported that their workplace did not have negative pressure rooms for aerosol-generating procedures, and 63.3% responders do not perform airway assessment before intubation. The device of choice for the first attempt at laryngoscopy was Macintosh laryngoscope (51.6%) followed by videolaryngoscopes with disposable blades (24.2%). Availability of rescue devices in case of unanticipated difficult airway is variable; laryngeal mask airway (70.1%), bougie (82.2%), and stylet (68.7%) were present at majority places. Frequency of airway-related adverse events including hypoxemia (69.8%) and failed first attempt intubation (35.2%) was significant.
conclusionThis survey found satisfactory knowledge, comparable practices, and offers some important insights about airway management in COVID-19 patients by healthcare professionals of Pakistan.
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.