ArticleAnesthesiology research and practice2023
A Prospective Cohort Study on the Respiratory Effect on Modified Mallampati Scoring.
Article in Anesthesiology research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mallampati scoring is a common exam method for evaluating the oropharynx as a part of the airway assessment and for anticipation of difficult intubation. It partitions the oropharynx into 4 categories with scores of 1, 2, 3, and 4. Even though its reliability is known to be limited by confounding factors such as patient positioning, patient phonation, tongue protrusion, and examiner variability, the effect of respiration, i.e., inspiration and expiration, has not yet been formally studied. Methods: Mallampati scores were collected from 100 surgical patients during both inspiration and expiration and later compared to the score obtained in the medical record, determined by a board certified anesthesiologist. Results: Score deviations from the medical record reference were compared for both inspiration and expiration showing that respiration affects Mallampati scores; for some patients, the scores improved (i.e., decreased), while in others they worsened (i.e., increased). The respiratory change effect was quantified and visualized by plotting the area under the curve of the histogram of the deviations. 42% of the patients had a worsening of scores by 1 or 2 points with inspiration while 36% of the patients had a worsening of scores by 1 or 2 points with expiration. Conclusions: Mallampati scoring is commonly used in evaluating the oropharynx as a part of the airway assessment and as a screening tool for difficult intubations. However, as this study points out, the respiratory cycle substantially affects the Mallampati scoring system, with significant deviations of 1 or 2 points. In a scoring system of 4 score categories, these deviations are remarkable.
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.