Observational studyJAMA surgery2019
Comparison of Systematic Video Documentation With Narrative Operative Report in Colorectal Cancer Surgery.
Observational study in JAMA surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Video Recording Patients for Direct Care Purposes: Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of International Empirical Studies and UK Professional Guidance.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Video-based coaching in surgical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Association between Surgical Technical Skills and Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- Proprietary platform artificial intelligence-based segmentation of surgical videos facilitates review and rating of operative recordings.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- A Novel Deep Learning Model for Predicting Colorectal Anastomotic Leakage: A Pioneer Multicenter Transatlantic Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Quality of primary total knee arthroplasty operative reports in a tertiary teaching hospital.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Article
- Video recording in GI endoscopy.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Accuracy of warm ischemia time measurement using a surgical intelligence software in partial nephrectomies: A validation study.BJUI compass · 2024Article
- Model-based individual life-spanning documentation in visceral surgery: a proof of concept.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2024Article
- Current trends and barriers to video management and analytics as a tool for surgeon skilling.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Adherence to quality indicators and best practices in surveillance endoscopy of Barrett's esophagus: A video-based assessment.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- A systematic scoping review protocol to summarise and appraise the use of artificial intelligence in the analysis of digital videos of invasive general surgical procedures.International journal of surgery protocols · 2023Article
- Young-IFSO Bariatric/Metabolic Surgery Training and Education Survey.Obesity surgery · 2023Article
- A comparison between real-time intraoperative voice dictation and the operative report in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a multicenter prospective observational study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Observational
- Multicentric validation of EndoDigest: a computer vision platform for video documentation of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Emilia-Romagna Surgical Colorectal Cancer Audit (ESCA): a value-based healthcare retro-prospective study to measure and improve the quality of surgical care in colorectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2022Observational
- Video is better: why aren't we using it? A mixed-methods study of the barriers to routine procedural video recording and case review.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Current perspectives on video and audio recording inside the surgical operating room: results of a cross-disciplinary survey.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Supporting laparoscopic general surgery training with digital technology: The United Kingdom and Ireland paradigm.BMC surgery · 2021Review
- Computer Vision in the Operating Room: Opportunities and Caveats.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Despite ongoing advances in the field of colorectal surgery, the quality of surgical treatment is still variable. As an intrinsic part of surgical quality, the technical information regarding the surgical procedure is reflected only by the narrative operative report (NR), which has been found to be subjective and regularly omits important information. Objective: To investigate systematic video recording (SVR) as a potential improvement in quality and safety with regard to important information in colorectal cancer surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Imaging for Quality Control Trial was a prospective, observational cohort study conducted between January 12, 2016, and October 30, 2017, at 3 centers in the Netherlands. The study group consisted of 113 patients 18 years or older undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. These patients were case matched and compared with cases from a historical cohort that received only an NR. Interventions: Among study cases, participating surgeons were requested to systematically capture predefined key steps of the surgical procedure intraoperatively on video in short clips. Main Outcomes and Measures: The SVRs and NRs were analyzed for adequacy with respect to the availability of important information regarding the predefined key steps. Adequacy of the reported information was defined as the proportion of key steps with available and sufficient information in the report. Adequacy of the SVR and NR was compared between the study and control groups, with the SVR alone and as an adjunct to the NR in the study group vs NR alone in the control group. Results: Of the 113 study patients, 69 women (61.1%) were included; mean (SD) age was 66.3 (9.8) years. In the control group, a mean (SD) of 52.5% (18.3%) of 631 steps were adequately described in the NR. In the study group, the adequacy of both the SVR (78.5% [16.5%], P < .001) and a combination of the SVR with NR (85.1% [14.6%], P < .001) was significantly superior to NR alone. The only significant difference between the study and historical control groups regarding postoperative and pathologic outcomes was a shorter postoperative mean (SD) length of stay in favor of the study group (8.0 [7.7] vs 8.6 [6.8] days; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: Use of SVR in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery as an adjunct to the NR might be superior in documenting important steps of the operation compared with NR alone, adding to the overall availability of necessary intraoperative information and contributing to quality control and objectivity.
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.