Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24719279›Full record

ArticleIrish journal of medical science2015

Time to surgical review: an assessment of the traditional model of emergency surgical care.

M E Kelly, C Conlon, G N Le, G J Nason, E Mansour, K C Conlon, P F Ridgway

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 84% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M E KellyThe Adelaide and Meath Hospital -Tallaght, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, michaeleamonkelly@rcsi.ie.
C Conlon
G N Le
G J Nason
E Mansour
K C Conlon
P F Ridgway
Trinity College Dublin · IETallaght University Hospital · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe traditional model for emergency surgical care consists of an on-call team providing service to the emergency department, while simultaneously balancing the demands of elective work. Various newer models, such as the "surgeon of the week" aim to reduce the conflict between elective and emergency duties. Despite the recent focus on newer models, there remains no data on the effectiveness of the traditional model. We aim to assess the efficacy of the traditional model in a large regional hospital.

methodsA retrospective study between July 2009 and March 2010 was performed. Primarily, we assessed the initial time to surgical consultation after emergency department referral. Secondarily, we evaluated the impact of time periods, days of week, and case-mix etiology on this consultation time.

resultsThe overall median time to surgical consultation after emergency department referral was 30 min (N = 860, P = 0.709). However, the median time to consultation was 60, 30, and 20 min for daytime, evening and night time, respectively (*P < 0.001). Trauma cases had a median time of 15 min, vascular had 45 min, neoplasm had 120 min, while other categories (upper and lower gastroenterology, and skin related) were 30 min (*P = 0.025). DISCUSSION: Newer models of acute surgical care have desirable outcomes in consultation times. However, regional and economical implications have a substantial impact on which model is feasible at local levels. We demonstrated that the traditional model still remains effective in a large sized tertiary referral unit.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overEmergenciesEmergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalEmergency TreatmentFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID24719279
OpenAlexW2091890060

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.