Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31799299›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2019

Treatment of hemorrhoids: A survey of surgical practice in Australia and New Zealand.

George E Fowler, Javariah Siddiqui, Assad Zahid, Christopher John Young

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Clinical Work-Integrating Care in Current Practice: A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

George E FowlerDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter EX2 5DW, United Kingdom.
Javariah SiddiquiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Newtown 2042, NSW, Australia.
Assad ZahidDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Newtown 2042, NSW, Australia.
Christopher John YoungDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Newtown 2042, NSW, Australia. cyoungnsw@aol.com.
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital · AURoyal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHemorrhoidal disease is the most common anorectal disorder. Hemorrhoids can be classified as external or internal, according to their relation to the dentate line. External hemorrhoids originate below the dentate line and are managed conservatively unless the patient cannot keep the perianal region clean, or they cause significant discomfort. Internal hemorrhoids originate above the dentate line and can be managed according to the graded degree of prolapse, as described by Goligher. Generally, low-grade internal hemorrhoids are effectively treated conservatively, by non-operative measures, while high-grade internal hemorrhoids warrant procedural intervention.

aimTo determine the application of clinical practice guidelines for the current management of hemorrhoids and colorectal surgeon consensus in Australia and New Zealand.

methodsAn online survey was distributed to 206 colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand using 17 guideline-based hypothetical clinical scenarios.

resultsThere were 82 respondents (40%) to 17 guideline-based scenarios. Nine (53%) reached consensus, of which only 1 (6%) disagreed with the guidelines. This was based on low quality evidence for the management of acutely thrombosed external hemorrhoids. There were 8 scenarios which showed community equipoise (47%) and they were equally divided for agreeing or disagreeing with the guidelines. These topics were based on low and moderate levels of evidence. They included the initial management of grade I internal hemorrhoids, grade III internal hemorrhoids when initial management had failed and the patient had recognised risks factors for septic complications; and finally, the decision-making when considering patient preferences, including a prompt return to work, or minimal post-operative pain.

conclusionAlthough there are areas of consensus in the management of hemorrhoids, there are many areas of community equipoise which would benefit from further research.

Indexed as

Clinical practice guidelinesConsensusHemorrhoidsSurvey

Identifiers

PMID31799299
PMCPMC6887603
OpenAlexW2991335372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.