ArticleBMC medical education2025
Clinical practices, self-confidence, and perceived barriers in tracheostomy care among respiratory therapists in Saudi Arabia: a national cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTracheostomy care is a critical aspect of respiratory therapy, requiring specialized knowledge and adherence to standardized protocols to ensure optimal patient outcomes. However, variations in practice and a lack of formalized guidelines may contribute to inconsistencies in tracheostomy management. Therefore, this study aimed to assess clinical practices, self-confidence, and perceived barriers in tracheostomy care among respiratory therapists (RTs) in Saudi Arabia.
methodsA cross-sectional descriptive survey was distributed from June to October 2024 among RTs in Saudi Arabia. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed to identify key trends and associations.
resultsA total of 1,012 RTs participated in the study, with the majority being male (588, 58.1%). Tracheostomy care was available in 90.7% of hospitals, although 22.4% reported the absence of specific protocols. Formal training in tracheostomy care was limited, with only 42.3% of RTs receiving 1-5 h of instruction. Attitude of evidence-based practices was generally positive, as 59.9% of respondents felt up to date with current guidelines. Confidence levels in managing tracheostomy patients were notably low (20.9%) and slightly higher for ventilator-assisted patients (23.6%). To enhance skills, 53.6% of RTs visited specialist centers, and many participated in conferences (52.2%) and workshops (49.2%). The most significant barriers to incorporating tracheostomy care into RT services included lack of knowledge (70.7%), inadequate training (59.7%), and the absence of standardized protocols (59.6%).
conclusionAlthough RTs demonstrated a solid understanding of tracheostomy care, variations in clinical practices and confidence levels were observed, primarily due to the absence of standardized protocols and formal training. Implementing targeted educational initiatives and developing clear protocols could significantly improve the quality of tracheostomy care and enhance patient outcomes.
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.