Skip to main content
. 2015 Jan 8;2015(1):CD010225. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010225.pub2

Cinar 2010.

Methods RCT comparing etomidate (n = 12) and ketamine (n = 10)
Participants 22 ICU patients
Interventions Etomidate 0.3 mg/kg versus ketamine 2 mg/kg
Outcomes Intubating conditions, haemodynamic response to intubation, total serum cortisol 5 min post‐induction, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, mortality
Notes Need more information. This was conference poster and no actual data is presented. Primary author and supervising author contacted by e‐mail. Waiting on response. Unable to include in analysis due to lack of data
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk "prospective, randomized, double blinded study" reported, but sequence generation and concealment not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk "prospective, randomized, double blinded study" reported, but sequence generation and concealment not described
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Mortality Unclear risk No description of incomplete data. Impacts on risk estimates not possible to describe, but bias possible
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Adrenal Gland Dysfunction Unclear risk No description of incomplete data. Impacts on risk estimates not possible to describe, but bias possible
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Hospital LOS Low risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 ICU LOS Unclear risk No description of incomplete data. Impacts on risk estimates not possible to describe, but bias possible
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Duration of mechanical Ventillation Unclear risk No description of incomplete data. Impacts on risk estimates not possible to describe, but bias possible
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Vasopressor requirements Low risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Organ Dysfunction Low risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk No description of incomplete data. Impacts on risk estimates not possible to describe, but bias possible
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk all relevant outcomes addressed
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk "prospective, randomized, double blinded study" reported, but no further description
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk "prospective, randomized, double blinded study" reported. Exact nature of double blinding not fully specified, so effects on measurement remain unknown