ReviewHealth science reports2026
Innovative Techniques and Challenges in Securing Endotracheal Tubes Among Patients With Facial Hair: A Scoping Review.
Review in Health science reports, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Securing endotracheal tubes in patients with facial hair who refuse to shave remains a significant clinical challenge for anesthesiologists and intensive care specialists. This scoping review aims to identify and evaluate innovative endotracheal tube fixation techniques in these patients. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Online Library, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Gray Literature Sources, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search focused on articles published between 1990 and April 2026. Eligible articles comprised case reports, case series, letters, editorials, reviews, and clinical trials related to endotracheal tube fixation methods in patients with facial hair. Studies without relevant fixation methods or without full text were excluded. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were independently screened by two senior anesthesiologists, and discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. A descriptive thematic analysis was conducted to identify patterns and systematically categorize fixation techniques. Results: From an initial pool of 47 studies, seven met the inclusion criteria: six case reports/letters and one randomized clinical trial. Three innovative endotracheal tube fixation categories were identified: facial coverings using Tegaderm, Dynaplast, or modified serum bottles; remote securement via straps or tapes positioned away from the face; and mustache-based stabilization involving ligation of the endotracheal tube to the patient's elongated mustache. Reported advantages included facial hair preservation, reduced jugular vein pressure, minimal surgical field disruption, wide materials accessibility, avoidance of adhesive-related reactions, and cost-effectiveness. However, identified limitations included lack of direct comparisons with conventional fixation techniques, limited generalizability due to anecdotal evidence bases, and insufficient evaluation in diverse surgical positions. Conclusion: Current evidence regarding standard methods for securing endotracheal tubes in patients with facial hair is limited, and long-term safety and efficacy are insufficiently evaluated. Future randomized controlled trials for comparing these innovative approaches with conventional methods are required.
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.