ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2026
Prehospital PEEP for Acute Respiratory Distress: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPositive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) can improve oxygenation and reduce the work of breathing in patients with acute respiratory distress. In the prehospital setting, systems providing continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP) and adjustable pressure-limiting (APL) valves are used inconsistently, and the evidence base is heterogeneous across their use in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, pneumonia and cardiogenic pulmonary oedema. PURPOSE: This scoping review aims to map the existing evidence on prehospital use of PEEP-based ventilation in adults with acute respiratory distress, including reported clinical outcomes and safety.
methodsThis scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported in line with the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). We will systematically search MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) with support from a research librarian. Empirical studies of adults (≥ 18 years) receiving PEEP-based ventilation in the prehospital setting will be eligible, including randomised controlled trials, observational studies, case series and well-described case reports. Two independent reviewers will screen, extract and map the data on study characteristics, interventions, comparators and outcomes, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Methodological quality will be appraised at study level using the Jadad Scale for randomised trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort and case-control studies. ANTICIPATED
resultsWe expect to identify a limited but clinically relevant body of evidence reporting effects on oxygenation, dyspnoea severity, escalation to advanced airway management, adverse events and feasibility. The findings will be synthesised narratively and presented in descriptive and tabular form. We specifically anticipate sparse evidence for the prehospital use of APL systems.
conclusionThis scoping review will provide a comprehensive mapping of prehospital PEEP use in adults with acute respiratory distress, summarising its clinical effects, safety signals and feasibility, and identifying gaps to inform future studies.
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.