ArticleDie Anaesthesiologie2025
[User behavior during functional testing of the ventilator: analysis of the use of the QUICKcheck and detection of misconnected ventilation tubes].
Article in Die Anaesthesiologie, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and research questionWhile patient safety during general anesthesia has improved in recent years, incidents still occur in anesthesia, particularly in the area of airway management and ventilation. In addition to a mandatory daily system test before using a ventilator, a QUICK check is recommended by the German Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) before connecting a patient; however, misconnections of breathing tubes are still possible and not necessarily detected by the device self-test. The aim of the present study was to analyze user behavior at modern anesthesia workstations regarding the verification and functionality of the QUICK check. MATERIAL AND
methodsA monocentric prospective recording of user behavior in handling the QUICKcheck was carried out as part of a medical simulation training course as well as a prospective, multicenter, explorative, anonymous survey of anesthesiology staff in various German hospitals.
resultsOut of 30 participating physicians 93.3% (n = 28) carried out a QUICK check immediately before connecting the simulation patient to the ventilator. Only 1 (96.6%) of the physicians did not recognize the incorrect connection of the ventilation tubes during their QUICK check. Of the participating physicians, 80% did not use the separate bag valve mask despite persistent ventilation problems on the ventilator. The online survey was answered by n = 187 participants, 64.7% of the participants stated that they always carry out the QUICK check, 31.5% sometimes and 3.7% never. The presence of a separate bag valve mask is always checked by 66.3% of respondents, by 29.8% sometimes and by 3.8% never. Of the physicians, 32% believed that the integrated self-test always recognizes a misconnection of the ventilation tubes.
conclusionThe present study reveals a heterogeneous picture of the application and understanding of the QUICK check as recommended by the DGAI. The lack of understanding of a standardized implementation of the check can be seen as further evidence of the importance of interdisciplinary training with a focus on human factors, communication and cooperation as opposed to a mere procedural implementation of established tools.
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.