Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2024
Difficult airway simulation-based training for anaesthesiologists: efficacy and skills retention within six months.
Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05913492 (Difficult Airway Simulation-based Training in Anaesthesiologists), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Difficult Airway Simulation-based Training in Anaesthesiologists: Efficacy and Skills Retention Within Six Months After Training
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Skill retention of advanced airway techniques after simulation training - a randomized prospective study.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Management of endotracheal tube dislodgement during transoral oropharyngolaryngeal surgery: a multicenter cross-sectional survey study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Unprepared airway: an ABCDE preparation framework for emergency intubation.World journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- The evolving landscape of airway education in anesthesia for head and neck surgery.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2025Review
- All India Difficult Airway Association 2025 Guidelines for the management of unanticipated difficult airway in adults under general anaesthesia.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- An evaluation of cadaver- and manikin-based surgical airway simulation training for emergency medicine resident doctors.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Emergency Airway Management: A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Cognitive Aids in Improving Outcomes and Provider Performance.Clinics and practice · 2025Review
- Airway management education and retraining: an unresolved paradigm.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Article
- Impact of simulation-based training on difficult airway management among anesthesia trainees and nurses as real team.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate how anaesthesiologists manage a "cannot intubate, can ventilate" (CI) and "cannot intubate, cannot ventilate" (CICV) scenarios, and how following simulation training will affect their guideline adherence, skills and decision-making immediately after training and 6 months later.
methodsA prospective controlled study was conducted from July to December 2022. Anaesthesiologists who applied for the continuous medical education course "Difficult Airway Management" were involved in the study. Each volunteer participated in two simulation scenarios (CI, CICV) with structural debriefing after each scenario. After the first simulation round, volunteers were trained in difficult airway management according to DAS guidelines, using the same equipment as during the simulation. The participants repeated the simulation scenarios the day after the training and six months later. The primary and secondary endpoints were compared between three rounds: initial simulation (Group 1), immediately after training (Group 2), and six months after training (Group 3).
resultsA total of 24 anaesthesiologists consented to participate in the study and completed the initial survey form. During the first session, 83.3% of participants had at least one major deviation from the DAS protocol. During the first CICV scenario, 79% of participants made at least one deviation from the DAS protocol. The second time after simulation training, significantly better results were achieved: the number of anaesthesiologists, who attempted more than 3 laryngoscopies decreased (OR = 7 [1.8-26.8], p = 0.006 right after training and OR = 3.9 [1.06-14.4], p = 0.035 6 month later); the number, who skipped the supralaryngeal device attempt, call for help and failure to initiate surgical airway also decreased. Simulation training also significantly decreases the time to call for help, cricothyroidotomy initiation time, and mean desaturation time and increases the odds ratio of successful cricothyroidotomy (OR 0.02 [0.003-0.14], p < 0.0001 right after training and OR = OR 0.02 [0.003-0.16] 6 months after training).
conclusionsAnaesthesiologists usually display major deviations from DAS guidelines while managing CI and CICV scenarios. Simulation training improves their guideline adherence, skills, and decision-making when repeating the simulation immediately after training and 6 months later. STUDY REGISTRATION: NCT05913492, clinicaltrials.gov, 22/06/2023.
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.