Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33423700›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2021

Expanding enhanced recovery protocols for cardiac surgery to include the patient voice: a scoping review protocol.

Nebojša Oravec, Rakesh C Arora, Brian Bjorklund, April Gregora, Caroline Monnin, Todd A Duhamel, David E Kent, Annette S H Schultz, Anna M Chudyk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Emergency Medicine with Advanced Surgery Protocols: A Review.Journal of environmental and public health · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nebojša OravecDepartment of Surgery, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, AE101-820 Sherbrook Street, Winnipeg, MB, R3A 1R9, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3281-4159
Rakesh C AroraDepartment of Surgery, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, AE101-820 Sherbrook Street, Winnipeg, MB, R3A 1R9, Canada.
Brian BjorklundEnhanced Recovery Protocols for Cardiac Surgery Patient Researcher Group, St. Boniface Hospital, 369 Taché Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R2H 2A6, Canada.
April GregoraEnhanced Recovery Protocols for Cardiac Surgery Patient Researcher Group, St. Boniface Hospital, 369 Taché Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R2H 2A6, Canada.
Caroline MonninNeil John Maclean Health Sciences Library, University of Manitoba, 727 McDermot Avenue, Winnipeg, R3E 3P5, Canada.
Todd A DuhamelFaculty of Kinesiology and Recreation Management, 208 Active Living Centre, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.
David E KentCardiac Sciences Program, CR 1005-St. Boniface Hospital, 369 Taché Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R2H 2A6, Canada.
Annette S H SchultzCollege of Nursing, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, 89 Curry Place, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2 N2, Canada.
Anna M ChudykHealth Services & Structural Determinants of Health Research, St. Boniface Research Centre, Winnipeg, Canada. anna.chudyk@umanitoba.ca.
St. Boniface Hospital · CAUniversity of Manitoba · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCardiac surgery is becoming increasingly common in older, more vulnerable adults. A focus on timely and complete medical and functional recovery has led to the development of enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) for a number of surgical procedures and subspecialties, including cardiac surgery (ERAS® Cardiac). An element that is often overlooked in the development and implementation of ERPs is the involvement of key stakeholder groups, including surgery patients and caregivers (e.g., family and/or friends). The aim of this study is to describe a protocol for a scoping review of cardiac patient and caregiver preferences and outcomes relevant to cardiac surgery ERPs.

methodsUsing Arksey and O'Malley's et al six-stage framework for scoping review methodologies with adaptions from Levac et al. (Represent Interv: 1-18, 2012), a scoping review of existing literature describing patient- and caregiver-identified preferences and outcomes as they relate to care received in the perioperative period of cardiac surgery will be undertaken. The search for relevant articles will be conducted using electronic databases (i.e., the Cochrane Library, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Embase), as well as through a search of the grey literature (e.g., CPG Infobase, Heart and Stroke Foundation, ProQuest Theses and Dissertations, Google Advanced, and Prospero). Published and unpublished full-text articles written in English, published after the year 2000, and that relate to the research question will be included. Central to the design of this scoping review is our collaboration with two patient partners who possess lived experience as cardiac surgery patients. DISCUSSION: This review will identify strategies that can be integrated into ERPs for cardiac surgery which align with patient- and caregiver-defined values. Broadly, it is our goal to demonstrate the added value of patient engagement in research to aid in the success of system change processes.

Indexed as

Cardiac Surgical ProceduresPatient ParticipationAdultAgedCaregiversHumansScoping Reviews as TopicCardiac surgeryCaregiverEnhanced recoveryERASPatient engagementProtocolScoping review

Identifiers

PMID33423700
PMCPMC7798193
OpenAlexW3118992777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.