ReviewHNO2021
[The first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic-impact on otorhinolaryngology].
Review in HNO, 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.
- Status quo after one year of COVID-19 pandemic in otolaryngological hospital-based departments and private practices in Germany.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe first year of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has already affected our public health care system to an enormous extent and will continue to do so in the future. Otorhinolaryngologists (ORLs) are suspected to be at high risk of infection, due to the high viral load in the mucosa of the upper airways. The current review evaluates the impact of the pandemic on ORLs' activities and assesses the risk infection.
methodsA selective literature research was conducted using relevant English and German terms for ORL, SARS-CoV‑2, risk, and infection at PubMed, medRxiv, and bioRxiv, as well as in the Deutsches Ärzteblatt and on the websites of the Robert Koch Institute and the Johns Hopkins University.
resultsProtection recommendations for ORL include general hygiene measures and wearing KN95 masks for routine professional activities. When in contact with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, it is recommended to extend the personal protective equipment by eye protection, gloves, cap, and gown. International otorhinolaryngology societies have released guidelines for procedures (e.g., tracheostomy, sinus surgery), propagating personal protection for the surgical team and reduction of aerosols. Testing for SARS-CoV‑2 in patients and medical staff can contribute to reducing the risk of infection. Vaccination would provide some additional protection for ORLs and other health care professionals with increased exposure to aerosols. There is increasing evidence that ORLs are at a high risk of contracting SARS-CoV‑2.
conclusionConsequent personal protection, frequent testing of patients and health care professionals, and the promised SARS-CoV‑2 vaccinations may provide adequate protection for highly exposed persons.
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.