ArticleSurgical endoscopy2010
Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consumer demand for surgical innovation: a systematic review of public perception of NOTES.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Pooled it
- The role of the laparoendoscopic single site totally extraperitoneal approach to inguinal hernia repairs: a review and meta-analysis of the literature.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2014Pooled it
- Single port/incision laparoscopic surgery compared with standard three-port laparoscopic surgery for appendicectomy: a randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Trial
- Single-port cholecystectomy versus multi-port cholecystectomy: a prospective cohort study with 222 patients.World journal of surgery · 2013Trial
- Trial
- Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Inguinal Herniorrhaphy: Experience of a Single Institute.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- [Clinical value of alternative technologies to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy - single port, reduced port, robotics, NOTES].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
- Middle Eastern women's attitudes and expectations towards vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES): a survey-based observational study.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Observational
- Endoscopic surgery - exploring the modalities.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2015Review
- [Minimal access surgery: A survey among surgeons in Central Germany].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015Article
- A multi-institutional analysis of open versus minimally-invasive surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma: results of the US gastric cancer collaborative.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014Article
- Article
- Can single incision laproscopic cholecystectomy replace the traditional four port laproscopic approach: a review.Global journal of health science · 2014Article
- The voice of Holland: Dutch public and patient's opinion favours single-port laparoscopy.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2014Article
- Article
- Magnetically anchored camera and percutaneous instruments maintain triangulation and improve cosmesis compared with single-site and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2012Article
- Magnetically anchored cautery dissector improves triangulation, depth perception, and workload during single-site laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2012Article
- Obese women's perception of bariatric trans-vaginal NOTES.Obesity surgery · 2012Article
- Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: is it a plausible alternative to the traditional four-port laparoscopic approach?Minimally invasive surgery · 2012Article
- Patient perceptions of natural orifice translumenal surgery.Minimally invasive surgery · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe face of surgery has changed over the past two decades with the introduction of laparoscopic techniques. The majority of surgical specialties now perform minimally invasive procedures hence decreasing the scarring, pain, and infection historically associated with open surgery. To further reduce the invasiveness of surgery, new surgical techniques like Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) and Single-Port Surgery (SPS) are under development. Despite investment from the medical device industry and enthusiasm from medical professionals, we must analyse patient preferences and expectations of these novel techniques. This analysis will help us establish the demand for such techniques and guide future resource allocation.
methodsA questionnaire-based study was derived to identify whether the concepts of innovative techniques are acceptable to the general population. Their preferences between different available surgical options were recorded along with their choices for new innovative techniques. This study was carried out face-to-face and by using an online survey. It comprised four questions based upon a hypothetical scenario of an acute appendicitis. All the data were captured in a prospective database and analysed using statistical software.
resultsA total of 750 participants from variable backgrounds took part in the study. NOTES or SPS without an established safety profile was accepted by 34.3% of patients. SPS was the most popular method followed by conventional laparoscopy. Open surgery and NOTES were the least preferred (ranked 1.78, 1.98, 2.94, and 3.27, respectively). Choosing between SPS and NOTES only, 80.6% opted for SPS, 11.8% NOTES, and 5.6% declined surgery. The most popular route of access for NOTES is oral (37.7%).
conclusionSingle-port surgery was the most preferred method and NOTES was the least preferred technique. This shows general acceptance of the concept of virtually scarless surgery but without using the natural orifices.
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.