ArticleBMC anesthesiology2026
Awareness and preparedness for local anesthetic systemic toxicity among surgical clinicians: a multi-center cross-sectional survey study.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 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
backgroundLocal Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity (LAST) is a rare but potentially fatal complication of regional anesthesia and local anesthetic infiltration. Despite established treatment protocols, the extent of clinician awareness and institutional preparedness across surgical specialties remains poorly characterized.
methodsThis descriptive cross-sectional study enrolled 192 physicians from eight surgical specialties across five tertiary-level training and research hospitals in Türkiye (April-May 2025). A validated, structured questionnaire assessed LAST knowledge, clinical practices, and institutional readiness. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent predictors of correct lipid emulsion dosing knowledge, adjusting for specialty, seniority, and training status.
resultsOnly 41.1% of participants had received formal LAST training. Correct identification of the recommended lipid emulsion bolus dose (1.5 mL/kg) was reported by 34.4% overall, rising to 58.2% among trained participants versus 18.1% among untrained participants (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, formal training (OR 6.38; 95% CI 3.21-12.68), anesthesiology specialty (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.67-5.91), and senior academic title (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.08-3.96) were independent predictors of correct dose knowledge. Early symptom recognition was reported by 49.5%. Aspiration before injection was performed consistently by 53.1%, and ultrasound guidance by 38.5%. Lipid emulsion was readily available in only 29.2% of departments.
conclusionSignificant gaps exist in LAST knowledge, preventive practices, and institutional preparedness across surgical specialties. Targeted simulation-based education, mandatory availability of lipid emulsion, and standardized institutional protocols are warranted to improve patient safety.
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.