ArticleZentralblatt fur Chirurgie2021
[COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany: The Current Situation in Thoracic Surgery].
Article in Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lessons learned by thoracic surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe new COVID-19 pandemic has an impact on routine thoracic surgery. Various concepts and recommendations are being pursued to protect patients and hospital staff. However, the implementation of these recommendations may depend on the existing infrastructure, local conditions and in-house procedural instructions. MATERIAL AND
methodBetween 11th May and 26th May 2020, an anonymous online survey on the topic of COVID-19 was conducted among thoracic surgeons in Germany. The survey consisted of 16 questions on the local COVID-19 case numbers, protective measures, procedural instructions and treatment concepts. The results were summarised, descriptively analysed and discussed.
resultsThe response rate of 42.6% (n = 66), included replies from 23 (34.8%) specialised hospitals, 18 (27.3%) maximum care hospitals and 14 (21.2%) university clinics. COVID-19-positive patients were treated in 65 (99%) clinics and 37.9% of the clinics also performed surgery on COVID-19-positive patients. Nasopharyngeal swabs were the main instrument for COVID-19 patient testing (in 95.4% of the clinics). Test results influenced decisions on treatment in 71.2% of the clinics. In 59.1% of clinics, safety equipment was supplemented with FFP2 masks and eye protection during thoracic surgeries due to the COVID-19 pandemic. DISCUSSION: Almost all thoracic surgeons reported that they had treated patients with COVID-19 and half of them also had performed surgery on COVID-19-positive patients. The applied procedural instructions as well as the effects of COVID-19 on treatment decisions and patient-doctor contact differed between the reporting clinics.
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.