Algorithms for difficult airway management: A review
Minerva Anestesiologica, ISSN: 0375-9393, Vol: 75, Issue: 4, Page: 201-209
2009
- 102Citations
- 86Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations102
- Citation Indexes100
- 100
- Clinical Citations2
- PubMed Guidelines2
- Captures86
- Readers86
- 86
Review Description
Difficult airway management and maintenance of oxygenation remain the two most challenging tasks for anesthetists, while also being controversial items in terms of clinically based-evidence to support relevant guidelines in the literature. Nevertheless, different expert groups and scientific societies from several countries have published guidelines dedicated to the management of difficult airways. These documents have been demonstrated to be useful in reducing airway management related critical accidents, despite their limited use in litigations and legal issues. The aim of this review is to compare different airway management guidelines published by the United States, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Germany, and Canada while trying to elucidate the main differences, weaknesses, and strengths for identifying critical concepts in the management of difficult airways.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know