ArticleJAMA network open2020
Exploration of Factors Associated With Surgeon Deviation From Practice Guidelines for Management of Inguinal Hernias.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do patients scheduled for inguinal hernia repair express a preference for the repair technique? What questions do they frequently ask?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Observational
- A Qualitative Study on Surgeon Perceptions of Risk Calculators in Emergency General Surgery.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Heterogeneity in the surgical approach to recurrent abdominal wall hernias: an opportunity for quality improvement.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of Bilateral Open Inguinal Hernia Repair and Rives-Stoppa Repair: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Variation in approach for midsize (4-6cm) ventral hernias across a statewide quality improvement collaborative.Surgery in practice and science · 2024Article
- ENGINE-An EHS Project for Future Guidelines.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2024Article
- The impact of value-driven outcomes initiative on endo-laparoscopic groin hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Five year trends in surgical technique and outcomes of groin hernia repair in the United States.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Nonsurgical Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Survey of Hand Surgeons.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
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
Abstract
Importance: Despite availability of evidence-based guidelines for surgery, many patients receive guideline-discordant care. Reasons for this are largely unknown. For example, evidence-based guidelines recommend a minimally invasive approach for persons with bilateral or recurrent unilateral inguinal hernias. Benefits are also noted for primary unilateral inguinal hernia. However, findings from previous quantitative research indicate that only 26% of patients receive this treatment and only 42% of surgeons offer a minimally invasive approach, even for recurrent or bilateral hernias. Objective: To explore factors associated with surgeon choice of approach (minimally invasive vs open) in inguinal hernia repair as a tool to gain an understanding of guideline-discordant care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Qualitative study performed as part of a larger explanatory sequential mixed methods design. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 21 practicing surgeons from a large statewide quality collaborative who were diverse with regard to practice type, geographic location, and surgical specialty. Qualitative interviews consisted of a clinical vignette, followed by semi-structured interview questions. Through thematic analysis using qualitive data analysis software, patterns within the data were located, analyzed, and identified. All data were collected between April 24 and July 31, 2018. Exposure: Clinical vignette as part of the qualitative interviews. Main Outcomes and Measures: Capture of surgical approaches and factors motivating decision-making for inguinal hernia repair. Results: Of the 21 participating surgeons, 17 (81%) were men, 18 (86%) were White, and all were 35 years of age or older. Data revealed 3 dominant themes: surgeon preference and autonomy (eg, favoring one approach over the other), access and resources (eg, availability of robot), and patient characteristics (eg, age, comorbidities). Conclusions and Relevance: Decision-making for the approach to inguinal hernia repair is largely influenced by surgeon preference and access to resources rather than patient factors. Although a one-size-fits-all approach is not recommended, the operative approach should ideally be informed by patient factors, including hernia characteristics. Addressing surgeon preference and available resources with a clinician-facing decision aid may provide an opportunity to optimize care for patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair.
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.