Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41445544›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2026

Challenges in perioperative code status management: a national survey among Swiss anaesthetists.

Samuel K Zumbrunn, Flavio Gössi, Benjamin Bissmann, Armon Arpagaus, Sebastian Gross, Christoph Becker, Simon A Amacher, Raoul Sutter, Kai Tisljar, Ariane Rossi and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Perioperative Code Status Discussions in Surgical Practice: Results from a National Survey Among Swiss Surgeons.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Samuel K ZumbrunnMedical Communication and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Flavio GössiMedical Communication and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Benjamin BissmannMedical Communication and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Armon ArpagausMedical Communication and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Sebastian GrossMedical Communication and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Christoph BeckerMedical Communication and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Simon A AmacherDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.
Raoul SutterFaculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Kai TisljarIntensive Care Unit, Department of Acute Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Ariane RossiClinic for Anaesthesia, Intermediate Care, Prehospital Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Marc LüthyClinic for Anaesthesia, Intermediate Care, Prehospital Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Luzius A SteinerFaculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Thierry GirardFaculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Sabina HunzikerMedical Communication and Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate current practices and beliefs among anaesthetists regarding perioperative code status discussions and management in surgical patients. Methods: A nationwide web-based survey was conducted in Switzerland among anaesthetists providers. Primary endpoint: proportion of participants routinely discussing code status with medium-risk patients based on the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system (ASA 3-4). Secondary endpoints: proportion of code status discussions in low-risk (ASA 1-2) and high-risk (ASA 5) patients; perioperative intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, severe complications, therapy limitations and management of patients with Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders. Results: Of 496 respondents, 474 were included. 56.8 % ( Conclusion: Code status discussions are commonly reported for medium-risk patients, but formal education is limited. Experience and clinical exposure increase the likelihood of such discussions. Enhanced training and clearer guidelines are needed to support consistent ethical management of code status in the perioperative setting.

Indexed as

AnaesthesiaCode status discussionDNRPerioperative periodResuscitation

Identifiers

PMID41445544
PMCPMC12722988

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.