ArticleBrazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
Use, perceptions, and barriers to supraglottic airway devices in Brazil: a national cross-sectional survey with global implications.
Article in Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier). 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.
- Airway Management: why training, judgement, and competence remain the most important technologies.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSupraglottic Airway Devices (SADs) are essential in airway management. However, little is known about their use, perceptions, and barriers in large, resource-variable healthcare systems such as Brazil. We aimed to assess current practice patterns, training exposure, and barriers to SADs use among Brazilian anesthesiologists and trainees.
methodsA nationwide, web-based survey that addressed demographics, training exposure, device availability, frequency of use, perceived safety and efficacy, barriers to use, and knowledge of SADs generations. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze regional and experiential patterns.
resultsA total of 432 completed responses were analyzed. Most respondents were fully trained anesthesiologists (75.5%) from all five Brazilian regions. Although SADs were widely perceived as safe (76.9%) and capable of providing adequate ventilation (74.3%), only 35% reported using them at least once per week, and fewer than 20% felt confident distinguishing between first and second-generation devices. Binomial logistic regression revealed that greater training exposure during residency was strongly associated with more frequent current use (OR = 7.3; 95% CI 3.8‒14.3, p < 0.001). The most common barrier was lack of operator experience (81.5%), followed by limited availability of devices (28.9%). Use varied across regions (p < 0.001), with 82% of anesthesiologists in the South reporting weekly use compared to only 15.4% in the North. Respondents were more likely to use SADs in limb surgeries, while use is limited in gastrointestinal and thoracic procedures.
conclusionsDespite favorable perceptions of safety and efficacy, SADs remain underused in Brazil, with marked regional variation and limited familiarity with device generations. Training exposure emerged as a strong predictor of current use, underscoring the importance of structured education and hands-on experience. Addressing gaps in training and improving device availability may help standardize practice and enhance the use of SADs across the country. Institutional Research Board approval n° 7.214.701; CAAE: 84060624.6.0000.8807.
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.