ArticleBJA open2025
Strategies to reduce the risk of unrecognised oesophageal intubation: a survey of Difficult Airway Society members.
Article in BJA open, 2025. 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.
- The need for capnography standardisation.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Strategies to reduce the risk of unrecognised oesophageal intubation: a survey of Difficult Airway Society members.BJA open · 2025Article
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: Despite multiple initiatives and consensus guidelines, preventable deaths from unrecognised oesophageal intubation continue worldwide. We aimed to establish what different organisations are doing to reduce the risk of unrecognised oesophageal intubation. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey of Difficult Airway Society (DAS) members using an internet-based survey platform. Members were invited to participate via e-mail over a period of 10 weeks (28 March to 07 June 2023). Results were reported according to the CROSS checklist. Results: The response rate was 39% (819/2125). About 50% (402/799) of respondents were providing training to reduce the risk of unrecognised oesophageal intubation and 9% (69/799) were planning to. Most of the training (69%; 310/449) is multidisciplinary. However, almost one-third of respondents (31%; 246/799) were from departments that were not planning any training. Non-training-related strategies (including but not limited to increased use of videolaryngoscopy, increased use or improving the interpretability of waveform capnography) were implemented in 39% (297/765) of respondents' departments and planned in 8% (60/765). Nearly one-third (31%; 237/765) were not planning any non-training interventions to reduce risk. Of those who responded, 17% (130/765) were from departments not planning Conclusions: Our study suggests that uptake of preventative strategies to reduce the risk of unrecognised oesophageal intubation remains inadequate. The authors suggest it is now time for the Royal College of Anaesthetists, DAS, and the General Medical Council to mandate strategies to reduce the risk of unrecognised oesophageal intubation.
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.