Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30662114›Full record

ArticleAnesthesia, essays and researches

Clinical Audit on the Practice of Documentation at Preanesthetic Evaluation in a Specialized University Hospital.

Yophtahe B Woldegerima, Semira D Kemal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anesthesia, essays and researches. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

2 authors.

Yophtahe B WoldegerimaDepartment of Anesthesia, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Semira D KemalDepartment of Anesthesia, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPerforming preanesthetic evaluation, documenting, and keeping readily accessible record are responsibilities of anesthetists. Documentation can improve overall patient outcome. It also has an irreplaceable role in medico-legal aspects. Documentation is one of the challenges of providing quality care.

aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of documentation practice during preanesthetic visits. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis clinical audit was conducted in the University of Gondar Hospital. Predefined 22 practice quality indicators were prepared according to modified global quality index. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics was performed using SPSS version 20.

resultsA total of 122 preanesthetic evaluation tools (PAETs) were reviewed. None of PAETs found fully completed according to the indicators. Trends differ between elective and emergency conditions. Indicators with high completion rate (>90%) were signed a consent, medical history, history of medication, allergy, anesthesia and surgery, cardiopulmonary examination, airway examination, preoperative diagnosis, and planned procedure. Anesthetic plan, vital signs, a name, per-oral status, premedication, and age were found with below average (<50%) completion rate.

conclusionsDocumentation practice during the preanesthetic visit was below the standard. Unclear instructions should be replaced with standardized contents. Providing regular trainings on clinical documentation for students and staffs, and introducing modern electronic-based documentation system and preanesthetic clinics may improve the practice.

Indexed as

Clinical record keepingdocumentationmedical documentationpreanesthetic evaluation

Identifiers

PMID30662114
PMCPMC6319065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.