Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31275574›Full record

ReviewHealth systems (Basingstoke, England)2019

Inventory management of surgical supplies and sterile instruments in hospitals: a literature review.

Ehsan Ahmadi, Dale T Masel, Ashley Y Metcalf, Kristin Schuller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health systems (Basingstoke, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Ehsan AhmadiDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Russ College of Engineering and Technology, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2099-743X
Dale T MaselDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Russ College of Engineering and Technology, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7562-4884
Ashley Y MetcalfDepartment of Management Systems, College of Business, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA.
Kristin SchullerDepartment of Social and Public Health, College of Health Sciences and Professions, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5692-6054

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Operating rooms are considered a significant revenue source, as well as the main source of waste and cost, among the hospital's departments. Any cost savings in operating rooms will have a broad financial impact. Over the last decades, many researchers and practitioners have conducted studies to deal with the issue of managing surgical supplies and instruments, which are highly affected by surgeons' preferences. The purpose of this article is to present an up-to-date review of research in the field of inventory management of surgical supplies and instruments. We have analysed the literature in a systematic manner and organised the identified papers into two groups: the papers that were published by scientific researchers and developed optimisation techniques and the papers that were published by practitioners and reported their observations of the current issues in the operating room. We also identify the future research directions leading to operating room inventory cost reduction.

Indexed as

healthcareInventory managementliterature reviewoperating roomsterile instrumentssurgical supplies

Identifiers

PMID31275574
PMCPMC6598505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.