ArticleAnesthesia and pain medicine2025
Analysis of characteristics of patients whose sugammadex claims were denied by the Auto Insurance Claims Review Department of Korean Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service: a retrospective single-center review.
Article in Anesthesia and pain medicine, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecently, there have been many cases where sugammadex used in traffic accident patients has been deducted from auto insurance claims. This study aims to investigate the characteristics of sugammadex deductions through retrospective analysis.
methodsWe included patients who underwent general anesthesia after traffic accidents at our institution between January 2019 and December 2023. Data for patients for whom sugammadex payments were deducted from the Auto Insurance Claims Review Department of the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service were obtained from the hospital's insurance department, and electronic medical records were analyzed. The characteristics of neuromuscular blockade (NMB) and its reversal, including administration time and dosage of neuromuscular blockading agent (NMBA) and reversal agent, intraoperative neuromuscular transmission (NMT) monitoring results, and reasons for sugammadex use, were assessed and analyzed.
resultsA total of 251 patients deducted sugammadex payments during the study period. The deduction rate significantly decreased from 88-100% in previous years to 43.4% in 2023. Sugammadex was used to reverse deep NMB (55.1%) and in high-risk patients (23.1%). Sugammadex was mostly used to reverse deep NMB (55.1%) and in high-risk patients (23.1%). NMT monitoring was documented in 81.3% of cases, with 38.9% showing deep NMB and 33.3% showing moderate NMB. Despite improved NMT documentation after 2021, sugammadex payment deductions persisted.
conclusionsSugammadex payment deductions occur despite clinical necessity, particularly in deep and moderate NMB cases. Thorough documentation may help reduce these deductions. Collaboration between healthcare providers and policymakers is required to use reversal agents guided by clinical evidence.
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.