Cited by 78Airway Management and Intubation TechniquesAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsTracheal and airway disorders

Effects of using the simplified airway risk index vs usual airway assessment on unanticipated difficult tracheal intubation—a cluster randomized trial with 64,273 participants

Open access
Nørskov, A.K., Wetterslev, J, Rosenstock, C.V., Afshari, A, Astrup, G, Jakobsen, J.C., Thomsen, J.L., Bøttger, M +21 more·2016·British Journal of Anaesthesia

Abstract

Background Unanticipated difficult intubation remains a challenge in anaesthesia. The Simplified Airway Risk Index (SARI) is a multivariable risk model consisting of seven independent risk factors for difficult intubation. Our aim was to compare preoperative airway assessment based on the SARI with usual airway assessment. Methods From 01.10.2012 to 31.12.2013, 28 departments were cluster-randomized to apply the SARI model or usual airway assessment. The SARI group implemented the SARI model. The Non-SARI group continued usual airway assessment, thus reflecting a group of anaesthetists' heterogeneous individual airway assessments. Preoperative prediction of difficult intubation and actual intubation difficulties were registered in the Danish Anaesthesia Database for both groups. Patients who were preoperatively scheduled for intubation by advanced techniques (e.g. video laryngoscopy; flexible optic scope) were excluded from the primary analysis. Primary outcomes were the proportions of unanticipated difficult and unanticipated easy intubation. Results A total of 26 departments (15 SARI and 11 Non-SARI) and 64 273 participants were included. In the primary analyses 29 209 SARI and 30 305 Non-SARI participants were included.In SARI departments 2.4% (696) of the participants had an unanticipated difficult intubation vs 2.4% (723) in Non-SARI departments. Odds ratio (OR) adjusted for design variables was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.77-1.38). The proportion of unanticipated easy intubation wa…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bja/aew057

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • 90% of difficult intubations are unanticipated.

    “with 90% of difficult intubations unanticipated”

    From Airway Management in Trauma (2018) · cites this paper as [19]

  • Anatomic markers are in general poor predictors of difficulty with airway management.

    “Anatomic markers are in general poor predictors of difficulty with airway management”

    From Airway Management in Trauma (2018) · cites this paper as [19]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nørskov, A. K., Wetterslev, J., Rosenstock, C. V., Afshari, A., Astrup, G., Jakobsen, J. C., Thomsen, J. L., Bøttger, M., Ellekvist, M., Schousboe, B. M. B., Horn, A., Jørgensen, B. G., Lorentzen, K., Madsen, M. H., Knudsen, J. S., Thisted, B. K., Estrup, S., Mieritz, H. B., Klesse, T., Martinussen, H. J., Vedel, A. G., Maaløe, R., Bøsling, K. B., Kirkegaard, P. R. C., Ibáñez, C. R., Aleksandraviciute, G., Hansen, L. S., Mantoni, T., & Lundstrøm, L. H.
Affiliations
  • Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
  • Aarhus University Hospital (DK)
  • Herlev Hospital (DK)
  • Frederiksberg Hospital (DK)
  • Glostrup Hospital (DK)
  • Kolding Hospital (DK)
  • Sygehus Sønderjylland (DK)
  • Bispebjerg Hospital (DK)
  • Roskilde Sygehus (DK)
  • Regionshospital Nordjylland (DK)
  • Vejle Sygehus (DK)
Corresponding author
Nørskov, A.K.
Venue
British Journal of Anaesthesia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-05
Volume
116
Issue
5
Pages
680-689
ISSN
0007-0912 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2340057065
Cited by
78
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 5
FWCI
11.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Anaesthesia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion)
Funders
TRYG foundation; Nordsjællands Hospitals research council; The National Research Council of Denmark; The Capital Regions funds for research; Dansk Selskab for Anæstesiologi og Intensiv Medicins fund
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
difficult intubation, preoperative airway assessment, anesthesiology department
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Intubation, Intratracheal, Male, Middle Aged, Preoperative Care, Prognosis, Risk Factors, Cluster Analysis, Treatment Failure, Risk Assessment, Airway Management

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