Observational studyCJEM2023
A prospective observational study comparing outcomes before and after the introduction of an intubation protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Observational study in CJEM, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intubation Practices and Outcomes in Diverse Emergency Departments Within a Single Health System.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Patients Requiring Tracheal Intubation by Helicopter Emergency Medical Services: A Retrospective, Single-Center, Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Characterizing intubation practices in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey of the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) sites.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Introduction of Infection Prevention Tracheal Intubation Protocol during the COVID-19 Pandemic Is Not Associated with First-Pass Success Rates of Endotracheal Intubation in the Emergency Department: A Before-and-After Comparative Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOrotracheal intubation is a life-saving procedure commonly performed in the Intensive Care unit and Emergency Department as a part of emergency airway management. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, our center undertook a prospective observational study to characterize emergency intubation performed in the emergency department and critical care settings at Manitoba's largest tertiary hospital. During this study, a natural experiment emerged when a standardized "COVID-Protected Rapid Sequence Intubation Protocol" was implemented in response to the pandemic. The resultant study aimed to answer the question; in adult ED patients undergoing emergent intubation by EM and CCM teams, does the use of a "COVID-Protected Rapid Sequence Intubation Protocol" impact first-pass success or other intubation-related outcomes?
methodsA single-center prospective quasi-experimental before and after study was conducted. Data were prospectively collected on consecutive emergent intubations. The primary outcome was the difference in first-pass success rates. Secondary outcomes included best Modified Cormack-Lehane view, hypoxemia, hypotension, esophageal intubation, cannot intubate cannot oxygenate scenarios, CPR post intubation, vasopressors required post intubation, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), and mechanical ventilation days.
resultsData were collected on 630 patients, 416 in the pre-protocol period and 214 in the post-protocol period. First-pass success rates in the pre-protocol period were found to be 73.1% (n = 304). Following the introduction of the protocol, first-pass success rates increased to 82.2% (n = 176, p = 0.0105). There was a statistically significant difference in Modified Cormack-Lehane view favoring the protocol (p = 0.0191). Esophageal intubation rates were found to be 5.1% pre-protocol introduction versus 0.5% following the introduction of the protocol (p = 0.0172).
conclusionA "COVID-Protected Protocol" implemented by Emergency Medicine and Critical Care teams in response to the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased first-pass success rates and decreases in adverse events.
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.