ArticleActa medica academica2024
Prevention of Oral Injuries during Endotracheal Intubation: Patients' and Anesthesiologists' Perspective.
Article in Acta medica academica, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim was to design accessible, simple, inexpensive protection for teeth and soft tissues during ETI, compare damage occurrence with and without protection, and investigate post-ETI orofacial pain symptoms. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe selection procedure for adequate protection was carried out after which a reduced elastomer mouthguard was selected. Fifty patients were divided into 2 groups. In the first group, ETI was carried out using a mouthguard, while in the second group it was performed without it. The mouthguard was fabricated by anesthesiologists. After the ETI procedure, the patients and anesthesiologists were asked to complete a survey.
resultsNo difference in intubation severity and time required for intubation between the two groups was present. Seven patients from the non-mouthguard group suffered injuries during the ETI procedure. No injuries were present in the mouthguard group. In 92% of cases anesthesiologists agreed that mouthguards should be used during ETI. However, most of them (96% of cases) agree that the mouthguard should be used only when there is an increased risk of tooth loss and/or tooth damage. There was a significant ETI effect on the emergence of new orofacial pain cases.
conclusionThe mouthguard adequately protected dental and soft tissues and did not affect the work of the anesthesiologist. A significantly higher number of patients experiencing temporomandibular joint and masticatory muscles pain after surgery indicates that ETI might be a risk factor for orofacial pain.
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.