Skip to main content

CORRECTION article

Front. Med., 05 August 2022
Sec. Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesiology
Volume 9 - 2022 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.999862

Corrigendum: Service evaluation of the impact of capnography on the safety of procedural sedation

This article is a correction to:

  1. Service Evaluation of the Impact of Capnography on the Safety of Procedural Sedation

    1. Read original article
\nGareth CorbettGareth Corbett1Peter PughPeter Pugh2Jurgen HerreJurgen Herre3Teik Choon SeeTeik Choon See4David de Monteverde-RobbDavid de Monteverde-Robb5Rafael Torrejon TorresRafael Torrejon Torres6Rhodri SaundersRhodri Saunders6Catherine LeonardCatherine Leonard7Amit Prakash Amit Prakash8*
  • 1Department of Gastroenterology, Cambridge University Hospital National Health Service Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom
  • 2Department of Cardiology, Cambridge University Hospital National Health Service Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom
  • 3Department of Respiratory Medicine, Cambridge University Hospital National Health Service Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom
  • 4Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospital National Health Service Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom
  • 5Department of Pharmacy, Cambridge University Hospital National Health Service Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom
  • 6Health Economics, Coreva Scientific, Koenigswinter, Germany
  • 7Health Economics, Medtronic UK Ltd., Watford, United Kingdom
  • 8Department of Anaesthesia, Cambridge University Hospital National Health Service Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom

A corrigendum on
Service evaluation of the impact of capnography on the safety of procedural sedation

by Corbett, G., Pugh, P., Herre, J., See, T. C., de Monteverde-Robb, D., Torrejon Torres, R., Saunders, R., Leonard, C., and Prakash, A. (2022). Front. Med. 9:867536. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.867536

In the published article, there was an error.

A correction has been made to the Conclusion. This sentence previously stated:

“The incidence of adverse events was significantly reduced by 53.2% (p <0.05).”

The corrected sentence appears below:

“The incidence of adverse events was significantly reduced by 43.2% (p <0.05).”

The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Keywords: safe sedation practice, monitoring, respiratory compromise, endoscopy, bronchoscopy, patient safety

Citation: Corbett G, Pugh P, Herre J, See TC, de Monteverde-Robb D, Torrejon Torres R, Saunders R, Leonard C and Prakash A (2022) Corrigendum: Service evaluation of the impact of capnography on the safety of procedural sedation. Front. Med. 9:999862. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.999862

Received: 21 July 2022; Accepted: 22 July 2022;
Published: 05 August 2022.

Approved by:

Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland

Copyright © 2022 Corbett, Pugh, Herre, See, de Monteverde-Robb, Torrejon Torres, Saunders, Leonard and Prakash. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Amit Prakash, YW1pdC5wcmFrYXNoJiN4MDAwNDA7YWRkZW5icm9va2VzLm5ocy51aw==

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.