Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16528461›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgery2006

Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis in children: a survey among Dutch surgeons and comparison with evidence-based practice.

E C T H Tan, R S V M Severijnen, C Rosman, G J van der Wilt, H van Goor

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgery, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The role of laparoscopy in the management of pediatric appendicitis: a survey of Polish pediatric surgeons.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2015
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

E C T H TanDepartment of General Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9101, 690, 6500, 6500 HB, The Netherlands. E.Tan@chir.umcn.nl
R S V M Severijnen
C Rosman
G J van der Wilt
H van Goor
Radboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLCanisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConsiderable variability exists in the surgical approach to acute appendicitis in children, affecting both quality and costs of care. A national survey provides insight into daily surgical practice and enables comparison of practice with the available evidence.

methodsA national survey was conducted in all 121 Dutch hospitals asking detailed information concerning diagnosis and treatment of children suspected of acute appendicitis. An evidence-based practice (EBP) score was developed on the basis of a critical appraisal of the literature, allowing for classification of reported practices with regard to the level of evidence and identification of hospitals working in accordance with the best available evidence.

resultsThe overall response rate was 93%. For the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, respondents relied predominantly on patient history (29%) and clinical examination (31%), followed by laboratory results (22%). Only 20% of the departments routinely measured total white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP) and leukocyte differential count (proportion of polymorphonuclear cells), being part of the triad that provides diagnostic evidence. Although strong evidence exists in favour of routine prophylaxis for suspected appendicitis, only two thirds of surgical departments reported this as part of their routine practice. For a number of issues, reasonably consistent evidence is available (e.g. primarily versus delayed closure, drainage versus lavage, routine peritoneal culturing). Thirty-eight percent of the departments routinely cultured abdominal fluid despite various reports that it provides no therapeutic advantage. Not more than 22% of the departments closed the skin in perforated appendicitis in spite of clear supportive evidence. Considerable variation exists in cleaning the abdomen in perforated appendicitis, despite evidence favouring lavage. Comparing departments in terms of compliance with available evidence revealed that most paediatric surgery departments worked according to evidence-based medicine.

conclusionsAvailable evidence on diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis in children is only partly applied in a small proportion of hospitals in the Netherlands. It is recommended that national guidelines be published, which could decrease health care costs and increase more uniform policy, improve quality of care for this group of patients and improve training of residents in general surgery in the Netherlands.

Indexed as

AppendectomyEvidence-Based MedicineAcute DiseaseAppendicitisChildCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth Care CostsHumansNetherlandsPractice Guidelines as TopicSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID16528461
OpenAlexW2152557291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.