ArticleBMC anesthesiology2025
Current practices in hemodynamic monitoring and management during non-cardiac surgery in Austria.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntraoperative hemodynamic monitoring has advanced significantly over the past few decades, enhancing patient safety and improving perioperative outcomes. This survey aimed to examine current practices in intraoperative hemodynamic management in Austria.
methodBetween January 2024 and February 2024, members of the Austrian Society of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care Medicine (ÖGARI) with a registered email address (n = 1,839) were invited to participate in an anonymous web-based survey.
resultsA total of 201 questionnaires were received, of which 177 were fully completed. When using intermittent oscillometry, 40% (71/177) of respondents measure blood pressure every three minutes during anesthesia induction. Nearly 45% (80/177) routinely insert an arterial catheter before anesthesia induction, using mean arterial pressure (MAP) to Guide blood pressure management. While 36% (61/168) consider a MAP of 60 mmHg critically low, 48% (80/168) set the threshold at 65 mmHg. Intraoperative hypotension is predominantly managed at individual discretion by 79% (140/177), while 12% (21/177) follow institutional standardized protocols. A pulse contour analysis monitor is available in 94% (166/177) of respondents, with 49% (87/177) reporting frequent use. Regarding the limited use of advanced hemodynamic monitoring in high-risk non-cardiac surgery patients, 64% (113/177) perceived its added value as too low, while 57% (100/177) cite a lack of experience in interpreting the parameters as a barrier to implementation. DISCUSSION: This survey among ÖGARI members provides key insights into intraoperative hemodynamic monitoring in Austrian hospitals. The findings suggest that respondents largely follow international recommendations, particularly concerning general blood pressure thresholds, measurement intervals, and indications for advanced hemodynamic monitoring. However, hemodynamic management appear to be only partially standardized, with decisions primarily left to the discretion of the anesthetist.
trial registrationThe study was prospectively registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS; registration number DRKS00033181 on December 6, 2023).
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.