Prediction in airway management: what is worthwhile, what is a waste of time and what about the future?
Open accessThe 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
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 [20]
In the main text (page unavailable), the authors report that usual assessment predicted about half of difficult direct-laryngoscopy intubations and that systematically recording seven airway parameters did not improve prediction. This supports limited predictive performance, but the claim generalizes from difficult intubation to airway management overall; the paper also identifies some markers useful for predicting difficulty with other techniques. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured90% of difficult intubations are unanticipated.
“with 90% of difficult intubations unanticipated”
From Airway Management in Trauma (2018) · cites this paper as [20]
The article (pp. 3–5) reports that 89–91% of difficult intubations were unanticipated in an analysis that excluded patients initially assigned an alternative intubation method. It then says that exclusion is inappropriate and favors an analysis in which approximately half of difficult intubations were predicted. The unqualified 90% claim omits that condition and the authors’ preferred interpretation. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- [1]1. Nørskov AK, Wetterslev J, Rosenstock CV, et al . Effects of using the Simpli fi ed Airway Risk Index versus usual airway assessment on unanticipated dif fi cult tracheal intubation a cluster randomised trial with 64273 participants. Br J Anaesth 2016; 116 : 680 -9
- [2]2. el-Ganzouri AR, McCarthy RJ, Tuman KJ, Tanck EN, Ivankovich AD. Preoperative airway assessment: predictive value of a multivariate risk index. Anesth Analg 1996; 82 : 1197 -204
- [3]3. Kristensen MS. Identifying and evaluating predictors of a diffi cult airway: the importance of not excluding the really interesting patients. Anesth Analg 2005; 101 : 928; author reply
- [4]4. Cattano D, Panicucci E, Paolicchi A, Forfori F, Giunta F, Hagberg C. Risk factors assessment of the dif fi cult airway: an Italian survey of 1956 patients. Anesth Analg 2004; 99 : 1774 -9
- [5]5. Rosenstock C, Gillesberg I, Gatke MR, Levin D, Kristensen MS, Rasmussen LS. Inter-observer agreement of tests used for prediction of dif fi cult laryngoscopy/tracheal intubation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005; 49 : 1057 -62
- [6]6. Kristensen M. Predicting dif fi cult intubation 2. Anaesthesia 2002; 57 : 613
- [8]8. Aziz MF, Healy D, Kheterpal S, Fu RF, Dillman D, Brambrink AM. Routine clinical practice effectiveness of the Glidescope in dif fi cult airway management: an analysis of 2,004 Glidescope intubations, complications, and failures from two institutions. Anesthesiology 2011; 114 : 34 -41
- [9]9. Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, et al . Practice guidelines for management of the dif fi cult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Dif fi cult Airway. Anesthesiology 2013; 118 : 251 -70
- [10]10. Law JA, Broemling N, Cooper RM, et al . The dif fi cult airway with recommendations for management -part 2 -the anticipated dif fi cult airway. Can J Anaesth 2013; 60 : 1119 -38
- [11]11. Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, et al . Dif fi cult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated dif fi cult intubation in adults. Br J Anaesth 2015; 115 : 827 -48
- [12]12. Caldiroli D, Cortellazzi P. A new dif fi cult airway management algorithm based upon the El Ganzouri Risk Index and GlideScope(R) videolaryngoscope: a new look for intubation? Minerva Anestesiol 2011; 77 : 1011 -7
- [13]13. Russo SG, Weiss M, Eich C. Video laryngoscopy ole! Time to say good bye to direct and fl exible intubation? Anaesthesist 2012; 61 : 1017 -26
- [14]14. Lundstrom LH, Moller AM, Rosenstock C, et al . A documented previous dif fi cult tracheal intubation as a prognostic test for a subsequent dif fi cult tracheal intubation in adults. Anaesthesia 2009; 64 : 1081 -8
- [15]15. Greenland KB, Segal R, Acott C, Edwards MJ, Teoh WH, Bradley WP. Observations on the assessment and optimal British Journal of Anaesthesia 117 (1): 3 -5 (2016) doi:10.1093/bja/aew147 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kovacs, G., & Sowers, N. (2018) · Emergency Medicine Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.emc.2017.08.006 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
- Authors
- Teoh, W. H., & Kristensen, M. S.
- Affiliations
- Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Kristensen, M.S.
- Venue
- British Journal of Anaesthesia
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-07
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-3
- ISSN
- 0007-0912 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4913402
- OpenAlex
- W2444073204
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- British Journal of Anaesthesia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Tracheal and airway disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
- Keywords
- difficult airway prediction, endotracheal intubation, direct laryngoscopy, Mallampati classification, thyromental distance, prediction accuracy, video laryngoscopy, preoperative risk stratification, anesthesiology department
- MeSH terms
- Forecasting, 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
