Cited by 49Airway Management and Intubation TechniquesAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsTracheal and airway disorders

Tracheal intubation in an urban emergency department in Scotland: a prospective, observational study of 3738 intubations

Kerslake, Dean, Oglesby, Angela J., Di Rollo, Nicola, James, Ed, McKeown, Dermot W., Ray, David C.·2015·Resuscitation

Abstract

Aim The emergency department (ED) is an area where major airway difficulties can occur, often as complications of rapid sequence induction (RSI). We undertook a prospective, observational study of tracheal intubation performed in a large, urban UK ED to study this further. Methods We reviewed data on every intubation attempt made in our ED between January 1999 and December 2011. We recorded techniques and drugs used, intubator details, success rate, and associated complications. Tracheal intubation in our ED is managed jointly by emergency physicians and anaesthetists; an anaesthetist is contacted to attend to support ED staff when RSI is being performed. Results We included 3738 intubations in analysis. 2749 (74%) were RSIs, 361 (10%) were other drug combinations, and 628 (17%) received no drugs. Emergency physicians performed 78% and anaesthetists 22% of intubations. Tracheal intubation was successful in 3724 patients (99.6%). First time success rate was 85%; 98% of patients were successfully intubated with two or fewer attempts, and three patients (0.1%) had more than three attempts. Intubation failed in 14 patients; five (0.13%) had a surgical airway performed. Associated complications occurred in 286 (8%) patients. The incidence of complications was associated with the number of attempts made; 7% in one attempt, 15% in two attempts, and 32% in three attempts (p Conclusion A collaborative approach between emergency physicians and anaesthetists contributed to a high rate o…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.01.005

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the emergency department, 20% to 30% of intubations are for trauma.

    “in the emergency department, 20% to 30% intubations are for trauma.1,2”

    From Airway Management in Trauma (2018) · cites this paper as [2]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kerslake, D., Oglesby, A. J., Di Rollo, N., James, E., McKeown, D. W., & Ray, D. C.
Affiliations
  • Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (GB)
  • NHS Lothian (GB)
Corresponding author
Ray, David C.
Venue
Resuscitation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
89
Pages
20-24
ISSN
0300-9572 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2021640299
Cited by
49
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
4.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Resuscitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Tracheal and airway disorders
Keywords
endotracheal intubation, emergency department, rapid sequence induction, intubation complications, intubation success rate, intubation attempts, airway management, surgical airway
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child, Preschool, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Hospitals, Urban, Humans, Infant, Intubation, Intratracheal, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Scotland, Patient Selection, Young Adult

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