Front-of-neck access simulators are severely under-validated, with only one study meeting inclusion criteria, and real-world predictive validity cannot ethically be evaluated for FONA¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Only one FONA validation study met inclusion criteria (content validity from six experts), and real-world predictive validity cannot be ethically or practically evaluated for FONA procedures. → McCarthy Roisin 2026

Evidence¶

McCarthy Roisin 2026¶

McCarthy Roisin, Maher Liam, O'Dea Angela. (2026). Validation status of definitive airway management simulators: a systematic review. BJA: British Journal of Anaesthesia. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2026.01.027

q3 · i? · review · r3

Review discussion of the single included FONA study (Kovatch 2020), a 3D-printed paediatric cricothyrotomy model validated only by expert opinion (n=6), with no construct or predictive assessment, no control groups, and no clinical performance outcomes.

"Unlike intubation or fibreoptic techniques, real-world predictive validity cannot be ethically or practically evaluated for FONA procedures."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Of 939 screened studies, only 17 articles validating 29 airway simulators met inclusion criteria, and most studies assessed only one or two validity domains — a broader claim this one bears on
• Predictive validity of airway simulators is rarely evaluated, and the two tracheal-intubation studies assessing it found no improvement in real-world neonatal intubation outcomes after simulator training — related