Citations 48

Clarifications on Technologies to Optimize Care of Severe COVID-19 Patients

Anesthesia & Analgesia | July 14, 2020 | Volume: 131 | Issue: 4 | Pages: e192-e193

10.1213/ane.0000000000005120 | PMID 32665462

In Response

Anesthesia & Analgesia | January 24, 2020 | Volume: 132 | Issue: 2 | Pages: e24-e25

10.1213/ane.0000000000004658 | PMID 31977361

Hand Hygiene and Relearning Lessons From the Past

Anesthesia & Analgesia | November 17, 2019 | Volume: 129 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1446-1449

10.1213/ane.0000000000004303 | PMID 31743159

In Response

Anesthesia & Analgesia | November 7, 2019 | Volume: 132 | Issue: 2 | Pages: e21-e22

10.1213/ane.0000000000004524 | PMID 31702697

Heuristics, Overconfidence, and Experience With Management of Neuromuscular Block: Self-Correction Is Unlikely

Anesthesia & Analgesia | September 2, 2019 | Volume: 129 | Issue: 5 | Pages: e172-e173

10.1213/ane.0000000000004377 | PMID 31478929

Anesthesiology Residents’ Documentation of Depth of Neuromuscular Blockade: A Proposed Refinement

Anesthesia & Analgesia | August 17, 2019 | Volume: 130 | Issue: 4 | Pages: e110-e111

10.1213/ane.0000000000004381 | PMID 31425260

The Clinical Use of Cricoid Pressure: First, Do No Harm

Anesthesia & Analgesia | August 8, 2019 | Volume: 132 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 261-267

10.1213/ane.0000000000004360 | PMID 31397697

Application of cricoid pressure (CP) during rapid sequence induction and intubation sequence has been a “standard” of care for many decades, despite limited scientific proof of its efficacy in preventing pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents. While some of the current rapid sequence induction and intubation guidelines recommend its use, other international guidelines do not, and many clinicians argue that there is insufficient evidence to either continue or abandon its use. Recently published articles and accompanying editorials have reignited the debate on the efficacy and safety of CP application and have generated multiple responses that pointed out the various (and significant) limitations of the available evidence. Thus, a critical discussion of available data must be undertaken before making a final clinical decision on such an important patient safety issue. In this review, the authors will take an objective look at the available scientific evidence about the effectiveness and safety of CP in patients at risk of pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents. We suggest that current data are inadequate to impose clinical guidelines on the use of CP because we acknowledge that currently there is not, and there may never be, a method to prevent aspiration in all patients. In addition, we reiterate that a universally accepted medical-legal standard for approaching the high-risk aspiration patient does not exist, discuss the differences in practice between the US and international practitioners regarding use of CP, and propose 5 recommendations on how future studies might be designed to obtain optimal scientific evidence about the effectiveness and safety of CP in patients at risk for pulmonary aspiration.
In Response

Anesthesia & Analgesia | July 26, 2019 | Volume: 129 | Issue: 4 | Pages: e139-e140

10.1213/ane.0000000000004333 | PMID 31348057

In Response

Anesthesia & Analgesia | May 27, 2019 | Volume: 129 | Issue: 2 | Pages: e62-e62

10.1213/ane.0000000000004238 | PMID 31313672

Proposal for a Revised Classification of the Depth of Neuromuscular Block and Suggestions for Further Development in Neuromuscular Monitoring

Anesthesia & Analgesia | March 19, 2019 | Volume: 128 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1361-1363

10.1213/ane.0000000000004065 | PMID 31094813