MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The airway and the anaesthetist

2001· letter· en· W2087422916 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. R. Ball, P. Jefferson

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2001
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)Airway managementAirwayMedical emergencyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Safe and effective anaesthesia depends crucially upon airway management. Our speciality urgently needs to prepare, provide and promote guidelines for this core skill. There has been an enormous increase in interest and activity in airway management, with more publications in the last decade than in the previous 50 years [1], many describing uses for new equipment [2]. We need a national strategy linked to the production of clinical guidelines to address these developments, putting them in context and providing our speciality with a firm foundation upon which to build. We live in an era of guidelines, systematically developed statements that assist in decision making about appropriate health care for specific conditions [3]. The Royal College of Anaesthetists has endorsed this principle, encouraging individuals and departments to develop protocols and standards based on recommendations within guidelines. The Association of Anaesthetists has produced a number of booklets over the years that approximate to guidelines on many issues. ‘Every department should have an agreed set of clinical guidelines to cover unexpected or unusual situations, e.g. failed intubation’[4]. But airway management has not received the attention it rightly deserves. In the College's recently published Guidelines for Service Provision [5], one has to look hard for guidance on this subject – there are brief mentions in training for resuscitation (one line, p. 35) and in obstetric anaesthesia (one sentence, p. 63), and that is all. It is 25 years since Tunstall first advocated reasoned approaches to airway management with his difficult airway drill [6]. The American Society of Anesthesiologists developed its Practice Guidelines for the management of the difficult airway with its algorithm in 1993 [7]. This comprehensive approach has not found great favour or acceptance in the United Kingdom, the guidelines considered by many to be too didactic and the algorithm so complicated as to be confusing. The Canadian Airway Focus Group has more recently contributed to the subject [8], but again this has the format of a review. We need a new approach with a set of reasoned and reasonable guidelines that are relevant to our clinical culture. The Difficult Airway Society is taking on this task. The case for guideline development was debated at their last annual meeting and more recently presented at the Winter Scientific Meeting of the Association of Anaesthetists in January 2001. We call upon our national bodies, College and Association, to work collaboratively with the Difficult Airway Society in the production of these guidelines. They should concisely and accurately define terms, promote a set of core competencies in planning, preparation and procedures for airway management relevant to all practising anaesthetists. Clinical, manikin and perhaps simulator skills can be specified. We advocate that each department has designated personnel for developing and promoting these guidelines in the same way that the position of designated paediatric or obstetric anaesthetist is now endorsed. The anaesthesia profession in the United Kingdom faces unprecedented demands. We have largely developed and provide critical care, with calls for further expansion into Critical Care Delivery Groups [9]. Now the anaesthetist is considered by many to be a ‘peri-operative physician’[10]. In responding to and coping with these demands, we are in danger of losing our way. Meanwhile, others, notably the recently christened (by some) speciality of ‘Emergency Medicine’, are busily developing strategies and tactics for airway management independent of anaesthetic involvement [11]. As anaesthetists, one of our main priorities remains airway management. We have a formidable reputation for innovative approaches to the airway, with a distinguished past. We can learn from the past, but we must not dwell on it. Rather, we must look to the future, deciding on what is truly important for our patients. We urgently need nationally agreed and endorsed guidelines on this most important subject, the airway and its' management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnaesthesiaSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207