ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021
The effect of advisory documents on mid-urethral sling case acquisition to the British Society Urogynaecology (BSUG) database in England.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2021. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisMany advisory documents have recommended uploading of all mid-urethral sling (MUS) cases onto the British Society of Urogynaecology (BSUG) or British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) database. The aim of this study was to determine whether these documents have resulted in an increase in database case acquisition for MUS surgery.
methodWe determined the number of cases uploaded onto the BSUG and BAUS databases and cases acquired by Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) over the period January 2011-March 2017 for the 6 months prior to each document and 6 months afterwards.
resultsThere was an upsurge in data acquisition in 2013, which then declined after year end. There was a significant upsurge in case acquisition associated with the following documents: NHS Medical Director letter (p < 0.00001), the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) audit (p < 0.00001). There was a significant drop in case acquisition following the end of the HQIP audit (p < 0.00001) and the Mesh Working Group Interim report (p = 0.00325).
conclusionThere was a significant increase in case acquisition with the HQIP audit and decline after it. The significant increase in case acquisition seen after the NHS MD letter in November 2012 may have been due to an overlap in the data capture between it and the HQIP audit. The levels of case acquisition do not compare to registries that are essentially compulsory and therefore we believe that voluntary databases are not effective for device post-market surveillance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32556850What 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.