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

Koksal 2013.

Methods RCT comparing etomidate (n = 20), etomidate + methylprednisolone (n = 20), and midazolam (n = 20)
Participants Adult patients, ASA III‐IV, requiring intubation in the ED or ICU
Interventions Group 1: etomidate 0.3 mg/kg, Group 2: etomidate 0.3 mg/kg AND methylprednisolone 2 mg/kg, Group 3: midazolam 0.5 mg/kg
Outcomes Primary: Random serum cortisol levels at 4 and 24 h. Secondary: post‐intubation haemodynamics
Notes Group 2 was excluded from our analysis because methylprednisolone was given. All results from this study exclude the outcomes for the 20 patients in group 2. This is an unpublished study identified in our grey literature search. The author has kindly provided us with a copy of the manuscript for inclusion. The study is to be submitted for publication
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Computer generated randomization
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Awaiting details from author
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Mortality Unclear risk Awaiting details from author
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Adrenal Gland Dysfunction Unclear risk Awaiting details from author
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Hospital LOS Low risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 ICU LOS Low risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Duration of mechanical Ventillation Low risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Vasopressor requirements Low risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 Organ Dysfunction Unclear risk N/A
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Awaiting details from author
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All outcomes from trial registration were reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk single blind study. Only outcome assessor was blind. Awaiting more details from author regarding allocation concealment
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk single blind study. Only outcome assessor was blind