ArticleIrish journal of medical science2015
A prospective audit of emergency urology activity in a university teaching hospital.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Characterization of genital injuries secondary to foreign bodies from 2011 to 2020.Investigative and clinical urology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUrology cover is commonly available out-of-hours in most teaching hospitals. However, increased pressure to reduce hospital expenditure has forced many institutions to consider removing middle grade cover outside of normal working hours. The aim of this study was to audit the emergency urology activity in our institution over a 12-month period.
methodsA prospective logbook was maintained for all urology referrals from the emergency department between August 2012 and March 2013. The diagnosis and patient outcome was recorded for each referral. The emergency theatre logbook was retrospectively evaluated for all emergency urology procedures carried out over the same time period. A basic cost analysis was performed to calculate the cost of providing the on-call service.
resultsA total of 752 patients were referred to the urology service over a 12-month period. The most common reasons for referral were renal colic and scrotal pain. Approximately 41 % of referrals were discharged directly from the emergency department. There were 167 emergency operations performed in total. The majority of emergency operations and referrals from the emergency department took place outside of normal working hours. A basic cost analysis revealed an associated cost saving of €58,120.
conclusionEmergency urology activity constitutes a large proportion of the workload at our institution. Restricting emergency urology cover would limit essential training opportunities for urology trainees, increases length of stay and delay treatment of urological emergencies. Urology "out of hours" cover is a cost-efficient method of service provision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24903123What 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.