Pharmacological methods for reducing coughing on emergence from elective surgery after general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation: protocol for a systematic review of common medications and network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emergence coughing and bucking, secondary to endotracheal tube stimulation of the tracheal mucosa, frequently occurs after the general anesthetic recedes. Besides general unpleasantness, coughing has important physiological sequelae that may be detrimental to the postoperative patient. Multiple pharmacological strategies have been published, but prior systematic reviews on this topic have neither been comprehensive enough in their literature or medication search, nor provided us the answer regarding what the best pharmacological method is to prevent or minimize peri-extubation coughing. Our systematic review and network meta-analysis' primary objective is to determine the relative efficacies of different pharmacological methods on decreasing coughing (none to mild compared to moderate to severe, as defined by the modified Minogue scale) during emergence after a general anesthetic with endotracheal intubation in adult elective surgeries. Medications of interest are lidocaine or lignocaine (intravenous (IV), intracuff alkalinized, intracuff non-alkalinized, topical, endotracheal application), dexmedetomidine IV, remifentanil IV, and fentanyl IV. These medications were selected based on a preliminary review of the literature. METHODS: Using a predefined search strategy, we will search MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ACP Journal Club, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and the Cochrane Methodology Register, with no date or language restrictions. Gray literature search will encompass conference abstracts, Web of Science, and references from publications selected for full-text review. Two reviewers will independently screen the retrieved literature using predetermined inclusion criteria, process publications selected for full-text review, extract data from publications chosen for study inclusion, and evaluate for bias using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment. Risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals will be calculated for each study, and a surface under the cumulative ranking curve will determine the relative rank of each intervention in its ability to prevent coughing on emergence. DISCUSSION: The proposed systematic review and network meta-analysis will not only provide a more thorough review of common medications used to decrease emergence coughing, but also inform clinicians which of these pharmacological strategies is the best approach. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018102870.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.035 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.025 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".