Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33458741›Full record

ArticleDiseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus2021

A multicenter prospective audit to investigate the current management of patients undergoing anti-reflux surgery in the UK: Audit & Review of Anti-Reflux Operations & Workup.

ARROW Study Group, Rob Walker, Tom Wiggins, Natalie S Blencowe, John M Findlay, Michael Wilson, Andrew C Currie, Steve Hornby, Sheraz R Markar, Saqib Rahman and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Results of the ARROW survey of anti-reflux practice in the United Kingdom.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2023
    Article
  2. 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

13 authors.

ARROW Study Group
Rob WalkerCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Tom WigginsCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Natalie S BlencoweCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
John M FindlayCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Michael WilsonCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Andrew C CurrieCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Steve HornbyCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Sheraz R MarkarCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Saqib RahmanCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Megan LloydCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Marianne HollymanCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Shameen JaunooCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 23924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are a variety of surgical and endoscopic interventions available to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease. There is, however, no consensus on which approach is best.The aim of this national audit is to describe the current variation in the UK clinical practice in relation to anti-reflux surgery (ARS) and to report adherence to available clinical guidelines.

methodsThis national audit will be conducted at centers across the UK using the secure online web platform ALEA. The study will comprise two parts: a registration questionnaire and a prospective multicenter audit of ARS. All participating centers will be required to complete the registration questionnaire comprising details regarding pre-, peri-, and post-operative care pathways and whether or not these are standardized within each center. Following this, a 12-month multicenter prospective audit will be undertaken to capture data including patient demographics, predominant symptoms, preoperative investigations, surgery indication, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes within the first 90 days.Local teams will retain access to their own data to facilitate local quality improvement. The full dataset will be reported at national and international scientific congresses and will contribute to peer-reviewed publications and national quality improvement initiatives.

conclusionsThis study will identify and explore variation in the processes and outcomes following ARS within the UK using a collaborative cohort methodology. The results generated by this audit will facilitate local and national quality improvement initiatives and generate new possibilities for future research in anti-reflux interventions.

Indexed as

Digestive System Surgical ProceduresGastroesophageal RefluxHernia, HiatalLaparoscopyFundoplicationHumansTreatment OutcomeUnited Kingdomanti-reflux surgeryclinical audit (MeSH)fundoplication (MeSH)gastroesophageal reflux (MeSH)hiatal hernia (MeSH)

Identifiers

PMID33458741
PMCPMC8522793

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.