ReviewBJA open2025
Ethical decision making in airway management: a difficult Airway Society position statement on good practice.
Review in BJA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Human Factors in Airway Management: Designing Systems for Safer, Team-Based Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Practitioners involved in airway management must balance ethical issues in their practice. Ethical tensions exist because clinicians must maintain clinical standards while maximising skill development, exploring advances in airway practice, and incorporating new learning to benefit future patients. Balancing the benefits and risks to the patient and choosing the right techniques in the right situations and with the right level of patient understanding and respect for patient autonomy can be challenging. These challenges are shared by airway practitioners from many professional backgrounds; however, this document has been developed specifically to support anaesthetists in their airway management decisions, and for simplicity, the term 'anaesthetists' will be used throughout the document. However, the ethical considerations will have relevance to all airway practitioners. Practice combined with training is central to professional development. Most patients are aware that training is entwined with care and trust anaesthetists to deliver this safely. Trainers should use airway teaching methods appropriate to the trainee's needs and skills. Informed consent is required for airway management, and the level of detail should be proportionate to the risks involved. Patients have individual preferences and appreciation of risks, so these conversations must be individualised. Anaesthetists should support the development of new airway devices and techniques. New methods must be assessed within governance structures, and it may be appropriate to collect data or feedback as part of the introduction to practice. Ethical practice requires doing what is best, doing it openly, honestly, and in patients' interests. The modern ethical and legal landscape has emphasised patient information, discussion, and documentation. We hope this position statement provides guidance, structure, and clarity for the benefit of our patients and our specialty.
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.