Inappropriate Citation of Retracted Articles in Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine Publications.

BACKGROUND: Retracted articles represent research withdrawn from the existing body of literature after publication. Research articles may be retracted for several reasons ranging from honest errors to intentional misconduct. They should not be used as reliable sources, and it is unclear why they are cited occasionally by other articles. This study hypothesized that several mechanisms may contribute to citing retracted literature and aimed to analyze the characteristics of articles citing retracted literature in anesthesiology and critical care. METHODS: Using the Retraction Watch database, we retrieved retracted articles on anesthesiology and intensive care medicine up to August 16, 2021, and identified the papers citing these retracted articles. A survey designed to investigate the reasons for citing these articles was sent to the corresponding authors of the citing papers. RESULTS: We identified 478 retracted articles, 220 (46%) of which were cited at least once. We contacted 1297 corresponding authors of the papers that cited these articles, 417 (30%) of whom responded to our survey and were included in the final analysis. The median number of authors in the analyzed articles was five, and the median elapsed time from retraction to citation was 3 yr. Most of the corresponding authors (372, 89%) were unaware of the retracted status of the cited article, mainly because of inadequate notification of the retraction status in journals and/or databases and the use of stored copies. CONCLUSIONS: The corresponding authors were generally unaware of the retraction of the cited article, usually because of inadequate identification of the retracted status in journals and/or web databases and the use of stored copies. Awareness of this phenomenon and rigorous control of the cited references before submitting a paper are of fundamental importance in research.

Breast Regional Anesthesia Practice in the Italian Public Health System (BRA-SURVEY): A Survey-Based National Study.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women. Surgery is a mainstay therapy unfortunately burdened by complications as severe postoperative pain. Regional anesthesia may play a role in a multimodal strategy for prevention and treatment of postoperative pain. The main purpose of this survey was to investigate the rate of use of regional anesthesia techniques in patients undergoing breast surgery in the Italian public hospital system. METHODS: We designed an online survey that consisted of 22 questions investigating the anesthesia management of breast surgery, particularly focused on regional anesthesia. The survey lasted from November 18, 2019 to February 28, 2020. Directors of anesthesia departments of 168 Italian public health system hospitals were contacted and invited to forward the survey to every anesthesiologist in their unit. RESULTS: A total of 935 anesthesiologists received the survey; among them 460 entered the final analysis. Regional anesthesia was not used by 44.6% of the anesthesiologists and lack of experience/training was the main cause (75.6%). Logistic regression models revealed that anesthesiologists with more than 15 years of experience (odds ratio [OR] = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33-0.93) or working most of their days in intensive care unit (ICU) compared to operating theater (OR = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.43) were less likely to perform regional anesthesia techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Low implementation of regional anesthesia techniques in breast surgery emerges from our survey and the major reason cited is a lack of proper training. An improved training program in regional anesthesia, especially in residents' curricula, could be useful to increase its rate of use and to standardize its practice.