ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2017
The front-line general surgery consultant as a new model of emergency care.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Acute Care Surgery Models Worldwide: A Systematic Review.World journal of surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Beyond the Knife: Evolution, Innovation, Challenges, Global Gaps, and the Future of Acute Care Surgery.Cureus · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the Costs and Consequences of Implementing an Optimization Process for Low-Complexity Emergency Care: The LINEA Program.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2025Article
- Impact of the Implementation of a Low-Complexity Emergency Care Protocol in the Patient Experience at a Level 3 Academic Institution in Colombia.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2024Article
- Critical limb ischaemia in the time of COVID-19: establishing ambulatory service provision.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2022Article
- Patient Satisfaction in Emergency General Surgery: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study.World journal of surgery · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Emergency general surgery services in England are undergoing rapid structural change with the aim of improving care. In our centre, the key issues identified were high numbers of admissions, inappropriate referrals, prolonged waiting times, delayed senior input and poor patient satisfaction. A new model was launched in January 2015 to address these issues: the surgical triage unit (STU). This study assesses the success of the new service. Methods All emergency general surgical admissions during a five-month period before introduction of the STU were compared with those of a comparable five-month period after its introduction. Process, clinical and patient experience outcomes were assessed to identify improvement. Results Attendance fell from 3,304 patients in the 2014 cohort to 2,830 in the 2015 cohort. During the 2015 study period, 279 more patients were discharged on the same day. Resource requirement fell by 2,635 bed days (23%). The number of true surgical emergencies remained consistent. Rates for reattendance (7.8% for 2014 vs 8.1% for 2015) and readmission (5.7% for 2014 vs 5.7% for 2015) showed no significant difference. Patient experience data demonstrated a significant improvement in both net promoter score (64.1 vs 82.2) and number of complaints (34 vs 5). Clinical outcomes for low risk procedures remained similar. Emergency laparotomy in-hospital mortality fell (11.4% vs 10.3%) despite preoperative risk stratification suggesting a risk burden that was significantly higher than the national average. Conclusions This novel model of emergency general surgery provision has improved clinical efficiency, patient satisfaction and outcomes. We encourage other units to consider similar programmes of service improvement.
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.