ReviewWorld journal of surgery2018
"The Longest Way Round Is The Shortest Way Home": An Overhaul of Surgical Ward Rounds.
Review in World journal of surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Optimizing ward rounds: systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions to enhance patient safety.The British journal of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Interventions to Improve Patient Care on Surgical Ward Rounds: A Systematic Review.World journal of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Improving ward round documentation using theBMJ open quality · 2026Article
- A Simple Solution for a Complex Problem: The "Sterile Cockpit" to Improve Ward Rounds.World journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Communication on Rounds: The Role of Rounds Culture and Communication in Patient Care and Teaching.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Review
- Proof of Concept for a Digital Framework to Support a Shared Agenda at Surgical Ward Rounds: Participatory Design Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Experiences and Needs of Core Participants in Surgical Ward Rounds: Qualitative Exploratory Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Lost in transcription - how accurately are we documenting the surgical ward round?ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Observational
- Improving Thoracic Surgery Ward Round Quality and Enhancing Patient Safety in a Referral Centre.Cureus · 2023Article
- The First Modified Delphi Consensus-Building Exercise on Surgical Ward Rounds in the United Kingdom National Health Service.World journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Introducing a structured daily multidisciplinary board round to safely enhance surgical ward patient flow in the bed shortage era: a quality improvement research report.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Otolaryngology trainee education.Head & neck · 2020Article
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
backgroundWard rounds, a keystone of hospital surgical practice, have recently been under the spotlight. Poor-quality ward rounds can lead to a greater number of adverse events, thereby cascading to an increased financial strain on our already burdened healthcare systems. Faced with mounting pressures from both outside and inside health organizations, concerted efforts are required to restore it back into prominence where it can no longer take a backseat to the other duties of a surgeon.
methodsThe nucleus of this narrative review is derived from an extensive literature search on surgical ward rounds.
resultsIn this review, we focus on the need for reforms, current characteristics of surgical ward rounds, obstacles encountered by competing interests and proposed solutions in delivery of effective ward rounds that can meet with newly laid guidelines.
conclusionWard rounds should be standardized and prioritized to improve patient care.
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.