Population-based incidence of anxiety-related behaviours during induction of general anaesthesia in children and efficacy of anxiolytic interventions: an international multicentre retrospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Preoperative anxiety in children is a significant challenge for anaesthesiologists. Although various pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions have been explored to reduce preoperative anxiety, comprehensive data on the incidence of anxiety and the efficacy of these interventions are lacking. This study aimed to determine the incidence of anxiety in children during anaesthesia induction and evaluate the effectiveness of different interventions using real-world data. Methods We conducted an international, multicentre, retrospective study, including patients under 18 yr undergoing general anaesthesia. Difficult inductions and anxiety were assessed using the Child Induction Behavioural Assessment tool and the Mask Acceptance Scale. Results Among 155 604 patient encounters across six centres, the incidence of difficult induction was 6.2%, the highest rate (11.5%) in children aged 1–3 yr. Significant anxiety behaviours were seen in 22.2% of children, the highest incidence (40.8%) in 1–3-yr-olds. Difficult mask acceptance occurred in 20% of cases, highest in the 1–3-yr age group (34.2%). Premedication was associated with a decreased incidence of difficult induction (adjusted odds ratio=0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.73–0.84, P <0.001). Conversely, parental presence at induction was associated with a higher incidence of difficult induction (adjusted odds ratio=1.77, 95% confidence interval: 1.55–2.01, P <0.001). 77.8% (121 084) of children did not exhibit anxiety during induction of anaesthesia; half of these required no interventions. Conclusions Most children manage without interventions, showing a lower incidence of anxiety behaviours than previously reported. This underscores the need for tailored, evidence-based strategies to address preoperative anxiety, particularly among younger children at greatest risk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".