Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36345922›Full record

Trial reportAnaesthesiology intensive therapy2022

Durapore vs. Hy-Tape for securing endotracheal tubes during general anaesthesia: a prospective randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Bardia Bahadori, Dan Drzymalski, Natalia Stamas, Shiu-Chung Au, Joyce Hoot, Sandhya Deverapalli, Andrea Tsai

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Anaesthesiology intensive therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Bardia BahadoriTufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Dan DrzymalskiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Natalia StamasDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Shiu-Chung AuDepartment of Dermatology, UMass Memorial Health, Leominster, MA, USA.
Joyce HootDepartment of Dermatology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sandhya DeverapalliDepartment of Dermatology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Andrea TsaiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA, USA.
Tufts Medical Center · USLahey Medical Center · USTufts University · USUMass Memorial Health Care · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAdhesive tape is commonly used to secure endotracheal tubes (ETT) during general anaesthesia. Although a variety of adhesives are used in practice, few studies have investigated the likelihood of different adhesives in producing facial skin injury. Given that differences in cost exist between adhesives that are often used interchangeably, it would be prudent to use the most economical option. MATERIAL AND

methodsA single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial of patients undergoing general anaesthesia with an ETT was conducted. Patients were randomised in a blinded fashion to use Durapore (DP) on either the right or left side of the face to secure the ETT, with Hy-Tape (HT) on the contralateral side. Skin photographs were taken prior to tape application and following tape removal. These were evaluated by three dermatologists to determine presence or absence of facial skin erythema, scaling, oedema, and tearing. Differences were compared using McNemar's test. For outcomes analysis, a non-inferiority margin of 20% difference was used with respect to the 95% CI.

resultsAmong 112 patients, 33.0% were male, with a mean (SD) age of 55.6 (15.9) years. Comparing DP vs. HT, noninferiority was demonstrated in the patients with skin erythema (1.8% difference, 95% CI: -5.6 to 9.2, P = 0.79), oedema (3.6% difference, 95% CI: -2.8 to 10.0%, P = 0.34), scaling (5.4% difference, 95% CI: -4.1 to 14.8, P = 0.31), and tearing (0.9% difference, 95% CI: -5.2 to 7.3, P > 0.99).

conclusionsThere is a non-inferior difference in the proportion of patients with facial skin erythema after use of DP vs. HT to secure the ETT.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, GeneralIntubation, IntratrachealFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSurgical Tapeendotracheal intubationgeneral anaesthesiamedical adhesivesskin injury

Identifiers

PMID36345922
PMCPMC10156546
OpenAlexW4308548938

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.