ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2020
Clinical practice in the management of postoperative delirium by Chinese anesthesiologists: a cross-sectional survey designed by the European Society of Anaesthesiology.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation of preoperative gut microbiota and postoperative delirium in patients undergoing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Preoperative Risk Factors Associated with Increased Incidence of Postoperative Delirium: Systematic Review of Qualified Clinical Studies.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A Cross-Sectional Survey on the Clinical Management of Emergence Delirium in Adults: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice in Mainland China.Brain sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn this survey, we assessed the current clinical management of postoperative delirium (POD) among Chinese anesthesiologists, after publishing the European POD guideline.
methodsWe administered an electronic survey, designed according to the European POD guideline. The survey was completed using mobile devices.
resultsIn total, 1,514 respondents from China participated in the survey. Overall, 74.4% of participants reported that delirium is very important. More than 95% of participants stated that they routinely assessed POD. In total, 61.4% screened for POD using clinical observation and 37.6% used a delirium screening tool. Although the depth of anesthesia (a POD risk factor) was monitored, electroencephalogram monitoring was unavailable to 30.6% of respondents. Regarding treatment, only 24.1% of respondents used a standard algorithm; 58.5% used individualized treatment.
conclusionOur survey showed that there are high awareness levels among Chinese anesthesiologists regarding the importance of POD. However, routine assessment and monitoring of all patients, including perioperative anesthesia depth monitoring, and a treatment algorithm need to be implemented on a larger scale. According to the results, efforts should be made to improve the knowledge of POD among Chinese anesthesiologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.