Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37429668›Full record

Trial reportBMJ paediatrics open2023

Video versus direct laryngoscopy to improve the success rate of nasotracheal intubations in the neonatal intensive care setting: a randomised controlled trial.

Susanne Tippmann, Janine Schäfer, Julia Winter, Ann-Kathrin Mühler, Katharina Schmitz, Mascha Schönfeld, Michael Eichinger, Eva Mildenberger, André Kidszun

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

Trial report in BMJ paediatrics open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Susanne TippmannDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany susanne.tippmann@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6088-1378
Janine SchäferDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.
Julia WinterDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.
Ann-Kathrin MühlerDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.
Katharina SchmitzDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.
Mascha SchönfeldDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.
Michael EichingerInstitute of Medical Biostatistics,Epidemiology and Informatics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Eva MildenbergerDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.
André KidszunDepartment of Neonatology, University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9329-6803
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEPlanetary Science Institute · USUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether video laryngoscopy (VL) for tracheal intubation of neonates results in a higher first-attempt success rate and fewer adverse tracheal intubation-associated events (TIAEs) when compared with direct laryngoscopy (DL).

designSingle-centre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial.

settingUniversity Medical Centre Mainz, Germany. PATIENTS: Neonates <44

interventionIntubation encounters were randomly assigned to either VL or DL at first attempt. PRIMARY OUTCOME: First-attempt success rate during tracheal intubation.

resultsOf 121 intubation encounters assessed for eligibility, 32 (26.4%) were either not randomised (acute emergencies (n=9), clinicians' preference for either VL (n=8) or DL (n=2)) or excluded from the analysis (declined parental consent (n=13)). Eighty-nine intubation encounters (41 in the VL and 48 in the DL group) in 63 patients were analysed. First-attempt success rate was 48.8% (20/41) in the VL group compared with 43.8% (21/48) in the DL group (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.88).The frequency of adverse TIAEs was 43.9% (18/41) and 47.9% (23/48) in the VL and DL group, respectively (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.97). Oesophageal intubation with concomitant desaturation never occurred in the VL group but in 18.8% (9/48) of intubation encounters in the DL group.

conclusionThis study provides effect sizes for first-attempt success rates and frequency of TIAEs with VL compared with DL in the neonatal emergency setting. This study was underpowered to detect small but clinically important differences between the two techniques. The results of this study may be useful in planning future trials.

Indexed as

LaryngoscopesLaryngoscopyHumansInfant, NewbornIntensive Care, NeonatalIntensive Care Units, NeonatalIntubation, IntratrachealNeonatologyResuscitation

Identifiers

PMID37429668
PMCPMC10335430
OpenAlexW4383872931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.