Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 182

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Difficult Airway Society 2025 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult tracheal intubation in adults

Open access
Ahmad, Imran, El-Boghdadly, Kariem, Iliff, Helen, Dua, Gunjeet, Higgs, Andy, Huntington, Mike, Mir, Fauzia, Nouraei, S.A. Reza, O'Sullivan, Ellen P., Patel, Anil, Rivett, Kate, McNarry, Alistair F.·2026·British Journal of Anaesthesia

Abstract

Advances in our understanding and practice of airway management necessitate contemporary guidelines for tracheal intubation. The Difficult Airway Society (DAS) therefore produced recommendations to improve the efficacy and safety of tracheal intubation. We conducted a systematic review and a three-round Delphi process to formulate multidisciplinary, evidence-based, expert consensus recommendations. We invited 20 external experts to guide recommendations on emergency front-of-neck airway and engaged DAS members and 16 international airway experts to provide feedback. Twelve members of the guidelines group participated in 65 meetings over 3 years, and 1241 papers were included after a systematic review. Sixty-five recommendations were made in relation to tracheal intubation. These included airway assessment and planning; peroxygenation; postintubation care; rapid sequence induction and intubation; the physiologically difficult airway; obesity; human factors; point-of-care ultrasound; documentation; and education and training. We maintain the concept of a linear algorithm encompassing tracheal intubation (Plan A); supraglottic airway device ventilation (Plan B); facemask ventilation (Plan C); and emergency front-of-neck airway (Plan D). The recommendations prioritise continuous oxygen delivery throughout airway management; maximising the likelihood of successful tracheal intubation at the first attempt; confirmation of ventilation with waveform capnography; progressing through the algorithm in the event of failure; multidisciplinary teamwork; and ongoing education and training. These guidelines are designed to support clinicians in delivering airway management that prioritises efficacy and safety. Overall, we emphasise the importance of maximising the chances of success, rather than the avoidance and management of failure, to improve outcomes for patients undergoing airway management.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bja.2025.10.006

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Metadata

Authors
Ahmad, I., El-Boghdadly, K., Iliff, H., Dua, G., Higgs, A., Huntington, M., Mir, F., Nouraei, S. A. R., O'Sullivan, E. P., Patel, A., Rivett, K., & McNarry, A. F.
Venue
British Journal of Anaesthesia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2026-01
Volume
136
Issue
1
Pages
283-307
ISSN
0007-0912 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4415977829
Cited by
182
References
5
FWCI
203.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Difficult Airway Society 2025 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult tracheal intubation in adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.bja.2025.10.006
The paper
Ahmad, I., El-Boghdadly, K., Iliff, H., Dua, G., Higgs, A., Huntington, M., Mir, F., Nouraei, S. A. R., O'Sullivan, E. P., Patel, A., Rivett, K., & McNarry, A. F. (2026). Difficult Airway Society 2025 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult tracheal intubation in adults. British Journal of Anaesthesia. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2025.10.006

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.