ArticleJMIR perioperative medicine2024
Factors Influencing Neuromuscular Blockade Reversal Choice in the United States Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Longitudinal Analysis.
Article in JMIR perioperative medicine, 2024. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeuromuscular blockade (NMB) agents are a critical component of balanced anesthesia. NMB reversal methods can include spontaneous reversal, sugammadex, or neostigmine and the choice of reversal strategy can depend on various factors. Unanticipated changes to clinical practice emerged due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and a better understanding of how NMB reversal trends were affected by the pandemic may help provide insight into how providers view the tradeoffs in the choice of NMB reversal agents.
objectiveWe aim to analyze NMB reversal agent use patterns for US adult inpatient surgeries before and after the COVID-19 outbreak to determine whether pandemic-related practice changes affected use trends.
methodsA retrospective longitudinal analysis of a large all-payer national electronic US health care database (PINC AI Healthcare Database) was conducted to identify the use patterns of NMB reversal during early, middle, and late COVID-19 (EC, MC, and LC, respectively) time periods. Factors associated with NMB reversal choices in inpatient surgeries were assessed before and after the COVID-19 pandemic reached the United States. Multivariate logistic regression assessed the impact of the pandemic on NMB reversal, accounting for patient, clinical, procedural, and site characteristics. A counterfactual framework was used to understand if patient characteristics affected how COVID-19-era patients would have been treated before the pandemic.
resultsMore than 3.2 million inpatients experiencing over 3.6 million surgical procedures across 931 sites that met all inclusion criteria were identified between March 1, 2017, and December 31, 2021. NMB reversal trends showed a steady increase in reversal with sugammadex over time, with the trend from January 2018 onwards being linear with time (R
conclusionsWe observed a steady increase in NMB active reversal overall, and specifically with sugammadex compared to neostigmine, during periods before and after the COVID-19 outbreak. Small, transitory alterations in the NMB reversal trends were observed during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, though these alterations were independent of the underlying NMB reversal time trends.
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.