ArticleDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2018
[Quality indicators for colon cancer surgery : Evidence-based development of a set of indicators for the outcome quality].
Article in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety of anastomoses in colorectal cancer surgery in octogenarians: a prospective cohort study with propensity score matching.BJS open · 2021Article
- [Case load and quality indicators in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021Article
- The future development of intensive care quality indicators - a methods paper.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2020Review
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
backgroundQuality assessment in surgery is gaining in importance. Although sporadic recommendations for quality indicators (QI) in oncological colon surgery can be found in the literature, these are usually not systematically derived from a solid evidence base. Moreover, reference ranges for QI are unknown.
objectiveThe aim of this initiative was the development of evidence-based QI for oncological colon resections by an expert panel invited by the German Society of General and Visceral Surgery (DGAV). Reference ranges from the literature and reference values from the Study, Documentation, and Quality Center (StuDoQ)|Colon Cancer Register were compared in order to deduce recommendations which are tailored to the German healthcare system.
resultsBased on the most recent scientific evidence and agreed by expert consensus, five QI for oncological colon surgery were defined and evaluated according to the QUALIFY tool. Mortality, MTL30 (mortality, transfer to another acute care hospital, or length of stay ≥30 days), anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention, surgical site infections necessitating reopening of the wound and ≥12 lymph nodes in the specimen qualified as QI owing to their relevance, scientific nature, and practicability. Based on the results of the systematic literature search and the statistical analysis of the StuDoQ|Colon Cancer Register, preliminary reference values are proposed for each QI.
conclusionThe presented set of QI seems appropriate for quality assessment of oncological colon surgery in the context of the German healthcare system. The validity of the QI and the reference values must be reviewed within the framework of their implementation. The StuDoQ|Colon Cancer Register provides a suitable infrastructure for collecting clinical data for quality assessment and risk adjustment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29189878What 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.