ArticleThe American journal of emergency medicine2026
Post-intubation sedation in the emergency department: A scoping review.
Article in The American journal of emergency medicine, 2026. 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.
- Post-intubation sedation in the emergency department: A scoping review.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEmergency departments (EDs) frequently manage patients who require intubation and mechanical ventilation. Post-intubation sedation is a critical component of ventilator management but is understudied in the ED environment. We conducted a scoping review to collate, characterize, and assess the existing biomedical literature on post-intubation sedation in the ED.
methodsWe searched multiple biomedical databases from inception through July 2025. We included completed original clinical research involving human patients undergoing mechanical ventilation in an ED setting, which reported clinically meaningful data regarding post-intubation sedation. We excluded non-clinical and non-original research. Conference abstracts and studies reporting on mixed ED and non-ED populations were included. Two authors reviewed studies for inclusion, and one author abstracted data.
resultsWe identified 80 studies meeting inclusion criteria, with 45 (56 %) available as manuscripts and 35 (44 %) as conference abstracts. Forty-five (56 %) were retrospective cohort studies, and 62 (78 %) were single center. There was substantial heterogeneity in definitions of post-intubation sedation and analgesia, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and reporting of post-intubation sedation medications. Patient-centered outcomes and process metrics, particularly safety outcomes and awareness under paralysis, were poorly reported. Associations between specific medications for post-intubation sedation and clinical outcomes were rarely investigated.
conclusionsWe identified many studies on ED post-intubation sedation, but they were limited by their primarily retrospective and single center methodology, and by substantial heterogeneity in definitions and outcome reporting. Further high-quality research with more rigorous methods and comprehensive outcome reporting is needed.
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.