Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40325448›Full record

ReviewScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2025

Confined space airway management: a narrative review.

Soren S Rudolph, Christopher W Root, Michael Friis Tvede, Trond Fedog, Patrick Wenger, Mikael Gellerfors, Jelsche Apel, Luca Ünlü

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Soren S RudolphDepartment of Anaesthesia and Trauma Center, Centre of Head and Orthopaedics 6011, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. Rudolph@dadlnet.dk.
Christopher W RootDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Michael Friis TvedeDepartment of Anaesthesia and Trauma Center, Centre of Head and Orthopaedics 6011, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Trond FedogThe Danish Air Ambulance, Brendstrupgårdsvej 7, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Patrick WengerAir Zermatt, Emergency Medical Service, Heliport Zermatt, 3920, Zermatt, Valais, Switzerland.
Mikael GellerforsSwedish Air Ambulance (SLA), Mora, Sweden.
Jelsche ApelDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Cantonal Hospital of Graubuenden, Chur, Graubuenden, Switzerland.
Luca ÜnlüDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 2, 4031, Basel, Basel, Switzerland. Luca.Uenlue@unibas.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAirway management is a critical component of prehospital and emergency care, often complicated by the environment in which it is performed. Confined space airway management (CSAM) refers to scenarios were restricted physical space challenges conventional airway techniques. These situations may occur in unpredictable environments, such as vehicle entrapments or collapsed structures, and controlled settings like helicopters. This narrative review aims to synthesize current knowledge, expert opinions, and evidence on CSAM. MAIN BODY: CSAM poses logistical and technical challenges, including limited access to the patient, restricted movement, and reduced visibility. These factors increase the difficulty of performing standard airway management procedures and increase the risk of complications. Supraglottic airways (SGA), due to their ease of insertion and high success rates, are recommended as a first-line approach in CSAM, especially when intubation is delayed or infeasible. Tracheal intubation (TI) may require significant modifications in technique. Alternative methods and adjuncts such as face-to-face intubation and stylets may be considered but are highly dependent on provider expertise and the specific scenario. Emergency front of neck access (eFONA) is provided with high success rated in confined spaces. In controlled settings, systematic preparation can improve success rates and reduce procedural times. In uncontrolled environments, prioritizing patient extrication and maintaining oxygenation is essential, as definitive airway management may conflict with rescue efforts.

conclusionCSAM requires a strategic blend of medical expertise, adaptive techniques, and logistical planning. A focus on training, preparedness, and the use of supraglottic airway devices may mitigate challenges in these high-stakes scenarios.

Indexed as

Airway ManagementEmergency Medical ServicesIntubation, IntratrachealHumansAirway managementConfined spacesEmergency medical servicesPrehospital careSupraglottic airway devicesTracheal intubation

Identifiers

PMID40325448
PMCPMC12054197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.