ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Why physicians use sodium bicarbonate during cardiac arrest: A cross-sectional survey study of adult and pediatric clinicians.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physiologic response to sodium bicarbonate administration during pediatric in-hospital cardiac arrest.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Cardiac Arrest Pharmacopeia: A Personalized Approach to Drug Administration During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.Critical care clinics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Despite recommendations against routine use, sodium bicarbonate (SB) is administered in approximately 50% of adult and pediatric in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). Methods: Cross-sectional electronic survey of adult and pediatric attending physicians at two academic hospitals in Boston, Massachusetts. The survey included two IHCA vignettes. Additional open- and closed-ended items explored clinician beliefs surrounding intra-arrest SB and perspectives on a hypothetical clinical trial comparing SB with placebo. Results: Of the 356 physicians invited, 224 (63 %) responded. Of these, 54 (24 %) said they would "probably" or "definitely give" SB in Scenario 1 (10-minute asystolic arrest) compared to 110 (49 %) for Scenario 2 (20-minute asystolic arrest; p < 0.001). The most frequently reported indications for SB were: hyperkalemia (78 %); metabolic acidosis (76 %); tricyclic anti-depressant overdose (71 %); and prolonged arrest duration (64 %). Of the 207 (92 %) respondents who reported using intra-arrest SB in at least some circumstances, the most common reasons for use were: "last ditch effort" in a prolonged arrest (75 %) and belief that there were physiologic benefits (63 %). When asked of the importance of a clinical trial to guide intra-arrest SB use, 188 (84 %) respondents felt it was at least of average importance, and 140 (63 %) said they would be "somewhat" or "very comfortable" enrolling patients in a trial comparing SB and placebo in IHCA. Conclusions: Physicians reported practice variations surrounding cardiac arrest management with SB. Respondents commonly cited metabolic acidosis and prolonged arrest duration as indications for intra-arrest SB, despite not being supported by the American Heart Association's advanced life support guidelines.
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.