ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2023
Success rates of endotracheal intubation using the standard method versus the modified-ramped position.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of the Emergency Airway: Clinical Considerations and Practical Strategies for Resident Physicians.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsReview
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The sniffing position used in intubation has disadvantages, including suboptimal glottic view, respiratory problems, increased risk of aspiration, and pain. In this regard, we have proposed new conditions to facilitate intubation and tube placement in patients with a Mallampati score higher than 2, by introducing a new position called the modified rapid airway management positioner (RAMP) position. The authors compared various parameters to improve intubation conditions between these two positions. Methods: This intervention is a randomized clinical trial study, with a random sampling method that divides the patients into two groups: a control group placed in the standard position (S) and an intervention group placed in the modified (M) RAMP position. An anesthesiologist performed intubation. In group (S), patients were placed in the supine position as usual, and a pillow with a height of 10 cm was placed under their heads. In group (M), the patients were placed in the supine position on a modified RAMP with a triangular shape, 15 cm in height, and 80 cm in length, at a 30° angle. The pillow had lengths of 20 and 80 cm. Results: In the present study, 112 patients were investigated, consisting of 58 women (51.8%) and 54 men (48.2%). The intubation time in the intervention group using the modified RAMP roll technique was significantly shorter (51.25 s) compared to the control group using the standard method (88.39 s) ( Conclusion: The results of the study showed that the modified RAMP roll improved the general conditions of intubation and led to a better view of the glottis in direct laryngoscopy. This is a very important aspect of intubation, and with a better view of the pharynx and glottis, the intubation procedure can be performed with higher quality, reducing the number of intubation attempts and the duration of the procedure.
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.