ArticleERJ open research2026
Flexible bronchoscopy in the intensive care unit: the FLEXICARE survey.
Article in ERJ open research, 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.
- Standardized low-flow ventilation with PEEP maintenance during bronchoscopy in mechanically ventilated ICU patients: a pilot trial.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
- Equal and safe use of flexible bronchoscopy in intensive care units.ERJ open research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Flexible bronchoscopy (FB) is a key diagnostic and therapeutic procedure in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, significant heterogeneity exists regarding indications, peri-procedural management, training and safety practices across ICUs. Data on real-world practices remain limited. Methods: An international, online cross-sectional survey was conducted by the European Respiratory Society's Acute Critical Care Group between May and December 2023. The questionnaire, designed according to Checklist for Reporting Of Survey Studies (CROSS) and Academy of Critical Care: Development, Evaluation and Methodology (ACCADEMY) standards, targeted healthcare professionals performing FB in ICUs. It addressed procedural protocols, sedation, ventilation strategies, complications, microbiologic sampling, tracheostomy practices and training. Only fully completed responses were included in the analysis. Results: Data from 266 respondents across 73 countries were analysed. Training in FB varied widely: 41% reported no formal training, and only 61% had access to a 24/7 bronchoscopy service. Sedation practices were heterogeneous. Ventilator settings were adjusted differently based on ICU certification, with ICU-certified physicians more likely to reduce positive end-expiratory pressure during FB (55% Conclusion: Substantial variability exists in FB practices across ICUs, particularly in training, sedation, ventilation adjustments and microbiologic sampling. Despite frequent therapeutic consequences, standardised approaches are lacking. These findings underscore the need for international consensus guidelines and structured training programmes to harmonise FB practices in critical care settings.
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.