ArticleEmergency medicine journal : EMJ2006
Things that go beep: experience with an ED guideline for use of a handheld metal detector in the management of ingested non-hazardous metallic foreign bodies.
Article in Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Soft Tissue-Borne Patient-Specific Guide for Foreign Body Removal in the Facial Region.Cureus · 2024Article
- Safety beyond Sight: Handheld Metal Detectors as Diagnostic Allies in the Management of Children Suspected to have Ingested Foreign Bodies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Increase in foreign body and harmful substance ingestion and associated complications in children: a retrospective study of 1199 cases from 2005 to 2017.BMC pediatrics · 2020Article
- Optical surgical navigation-assisted removal of a foreign body using a splint to simplify the registration process: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2019Article
- A review of full-body radiography in nontraumatic emergency medicine.Emergency medicine international · 2012Article
- Accidental mobile phone card ingestion.BMJ case reports · 2009Article
- Case of the month: Accidental mobile phone card ingestion.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo review compliance with our emergency department (ED) guideline on the imaging of ingested non-hazardous metallic foreign bodies in children, investigate adverse outcomes, and make suggestions for improving the guideline.
methodsRetrospective analysis of patients presenting in a 3 year period to a paediatric ED with a history of possible metallic foreign body (MFB) ingestion, who were managed according to an ED guideline.
resultsWe identified 430 episodes of possible MFB ingestion, of which 422 were eligible for inclusion in the study. Compliance with the guideline was 77.8% with no significant adverse events. The exclusion of symptoms as a criterion for x ray results in a reduction in the x ray rate of 56% in the symptomatic group with no increase in adverse events.
conclusionA handheld metal detector (HMD) can be safely and reliably used in lieu of plain radiography to investigate children with a history of MFB ingestion, irrespective of symptoms and without incurring any significant adverse events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.