ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2020
Improving Incidental Finding Documentation in Trauma Patients Amidst Poor Access to Follow-up Care.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIncidental findings (IFs) are common among injured patients and create a complex problem with no standardized solution. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a retrospective review of adult trauma patients admitted to a level I trauma center from January to May 2017. IFs from abdominal, chest, and neck imaging were categorized based on previously published guidelines focused on clinically significant IFs. Patient demographics related to access to care were collected. Outcome measures included documentation and patient notification of IFs. A univariate analysis was performed to identify characteristics that were associated with these outcomes.
resultsOf 1671 patients, 682 met inclusion criteria, and 418 (61.3%) had any IF based on the a priori categorization scheme. In total, 67 (9.8%) were homeless, 58 (8.5%) had no health insurance, and 115 (16.9%) had no established primary care provider prior to admission. Documentation of IFs was included in discharge summaries and instructions 76.5% and 40.2% of the time, respectively. Physicians were statistically more likely to appropriately document IFs when radiologists provided specific recommendations. Transfer to another hospital service prior to discharge and discharge to another acute care facility were associated with reduced rates of successful documentation. No factors significantly affected documentation of patient notification.
conclusionsTrauma patients are at risk for poor access to follow-up care of IFs. Expanding IF-specific guidelines, collaborating with radiologists to facilitate their inclusion in reports, and ensuring that IFs are part of patient hand-offs could provide systematic methods of improving their documentation.
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.