ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2026
Neuromuscular Block and Video Laryngoscope to Facilitate Intubation-A Survey of Current Practice in Denmark and Sweden.
Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Remifentanil Versus Rocuronium for Optimising Video Laryngoscopy Assisted Tracheal Intubation-The ROCVIDEO Trial Protocol.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Neuromuscular Block and Video Laryngoscope to Facilitate Intubation-A Survey of Current Practice in Denmark and Sweden.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) provide optimal conditions for tracheal intubation. A high dose of opioid can be used as an alternative but may give suboptimal conditions for intubation. The use of a video laryngoscope for intubation might eliminate this potential difference.
methodsA survey examining clinical practice regarding tracheal intubation with and without NMBA and use of video laryngoscopes was conducted in Sweden and Denmark.
results1771 out of 3181 (56%) of invited anaesthetists responded. Overall, 1365/1771 (77%) preferred using NMBAs for non-acute tracheal intubation with a considerably higher NMBA preference in Sweden 1011/1073 (94%) than in Denmark 354/700 (51%). A high proportion of Danish anaesthetists 327/700 (47%) compared to 40/1071 (4%) of Swedish anaesthetists reported primarily using opioids without NMBA. Remifentanil was the preferred opioid (1158/1361 (85%)) for intubation without NMBA. The reasons for using NMBA were improved intubating conditions (948/1771 (54%)), departmental tradition (285/1771 (16%)), adherence to local guidelines (264/1771 (15%)), and adherence to national/international guidelines (143/1771 (8%)). Video laryngoscopes were present in every operating theatre for 349/700 (50%) of Danish anaesthetists and 131/1071 (12%) of Swedish anaesthetists. Video laryngoscopes were easily accessible outside the operating room for 350/700 (50%) of Danish anaesthetists and 940/1071 (88%) of Swedish anaesthetists.
conclusionsNMBA use remains the standard for non-acute tracheal intubation. However, a substantial number of anaesthetists regularly employ a NMBA-free approach facilitated by high-potency opioids and video laryngoscopy, particularly in Denmark. These findings emphasise the need for further research and subsequently updated evidence-based guidance to support safe and effective intubation practices. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This study, reporting a survey of anesthesia practitioners in Sweden and Denmark assessed preferences concerning how the respondents would manage a series of case scenarios concerning anesthetic drug choices for facilitation of intubation and employment of video laryngoscopy. Quite a bit of variation for preferences is presented by the responses concerning neuromuscular blockade or not to facilitate intubation.
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.