ArticleCureus2025
Teaching Foundation Doctors How to Manage Tracheostomy Emergencies.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- STR1DE: A Near-Peer Approach to FY1 Teaching.The clinical teacher · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Tracheostomies are increasingly common in both acute and long-term clinical settings. As more and more patients with tracheostomies are being managed on general wards, Foundation Year 1 (FY1) doctors - often the first responders - require competency in managing life-threatening tracheostomy emergencies. This study aimed to investigate whether a short, targeted educational intervention can improve FY1 doctors' knowledge and confidence in this area. Methods A single-centre pilot educational intervention was delivered to 34 FY1 doctors in a UK teaching hospital. The intervention included a 30-minute lecture on surgical airway anatomy and the National Tracheostomy Safety Project (NTSP) algorithm, followed by small-group, high-fidelity simulation scenarios. To evidence improvement in knowledge, a quasi-experimental, single-arm study was undertaken, involving assessment of FY1s' knowledge via a written examination at three time points: pre-educational intervention, immediate post-educational intervention, and one month after the educational intervention. Results Baseline knowledge was poor, with only eight (25%) of 32 FY1 doctors correctly identifying the difference between tracheostomy and laryngectomy, 14 (41%) correctly identifying the breathing route in laryngectomy patients, and only 11 (10%) of the 103 proposed management actions when managing a tracheostomy emergency actions they suggested were specifically correct. Post-intervention, correct responses rose across all domains, with sustained improvements seen one month later for the answers to the second and third questions. Conclusions An educational intervention combining didactic teaching with simulation improved and sustained FY1 doctors' knowledge and preparedness for dealing with tracheostomy emergencies. Despite limitations such as sample size and knowledge-based assessments, these findings suggest that this was a successful pilot intervention. Future efforts should include broader implementation and performance-based assessments.
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.