SynthesisBMC health services research2020
Minimum volume standards in day surgery: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- A Qualitative Patient Journey Map of the Ophthalmic Day-Surgery Experience.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- A comparative study on percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures under day surgery and inpatient management models.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Assessing Hospital Surgical Functions in Korea: A Functional Analysis Using the Disease Control Priorities, 3rd Edition Essential Surgery List (2013-2022).Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2025Article
- Association Between Pre-Hospital e-Education via QR Code and Hospital Stay in Inguinal Hernia Patients Undergoing General Anaesthesia: A Retrospective Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Minimum Volume Standards: An Incentive To Perform More Radical Cystectomies?European urology open science · 2023Article
- The effect of minimum volume standards in hospitals (MIVOS) - protocol of a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Recommendations for outpatient activity in COVID-19 pandemic.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim was to find out if and for what indications are minimum volume standards (MVS) applied in the day surgery setting and whether the application of MVS improves patient relevant outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive systematic literature search in seven databases on July 12th, 2019. Concerning effectiveness and safety, the data retrieved from the selected studies were systematically extracted into data-extraction tables. Two independent researchers (MS, CS) systematically assessed the quality of evidence using the quality assessment tool for individual studies of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) called Task Force Checklist for Quality Assessment of Retrospective Database Studies. No instances of disagreement occurred. No further data processing was applied.
resultsThe systematic literature search, together with hand search, yielded 595 hits. No prospective or controlled studies were found. Data from eight retrospective studies were used in the analysis of clinical effectiveness and safety on seven indications: anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, cataract surgery, meniscectomy, thyroidectomy, primary hip arthroscopy, open carpal tunnel release, and rotator cuff repair. All interventions (except for carpal tunnel release and thyroidectomy) confirmed a volume-outcome relationship (VOR) with relation to surgeon/hospital volume, however, none established MVS for the respective interventions. Safety related data were reported without its relationship to surgeon/hospital volume.
conclusionsThis present paper provides some evidence in favor of the VOR, however, it based on low quality retrospective data-analyses. The present results cannot offer any clear-cut MVS thresholds for the day surgery setting and so the simple transition from inpatient results (that support MVS) to the day surgery setting is questionable. Further quality assuring policy approaches should be considered.
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.