Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34323145›Full record

ArticleScience progress

The myth of pre-operative isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Filip Mijovic, Stuart James, Bindhiya Thomas, Mohit Bhatia, Guillaume Lafaurie, Rehana Hafeez, Frank Smedley

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science progress. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Filip MijovicPrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, UK.
Stuart JamesPrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0608-0745
Bindhiya ThomasPrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, UK.
Mohit BhatiaPrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, UK.
Guillaume LafauriePrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, UK.
Rehana HafeezPrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, UK.
Frank SmedleyPrincess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, UK.
Princess Royal University Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic called for the restructuring of National Health Service (NHS) surgical departments across the country. Initial guidance advised that patients undergoing elective surgery isolate for 14 days prior to their operation. As we learnt more about COVID-19 and its incubation period, at the Princess Royal University Hospital this guidance has been decreased to 72 h. We collected retrospective data for two patient cohorts that underwent elective surgery in June and September 2020, isolating for 14 days and 72 h, respectively. We followed-up these patients with several questions allowing us to categorise the cohorts into three groups based on their compliance with isolation measures and also to assess their satisfaction with the isolation process. Our data shows that only 16% of the June cohort and 53% of the September cohort isolated in accordance with the guidelines whilst patient satisfaction was 16% and 64% respectively. These results highlight a suboptimal compliance to pre-operative guidelines as well as an adverse effect on patient mental health and raise the issue of both patient and NHS staff safety. With the possibility of a COVID-19 second wave and for future pandemics, a clear evidence-based plan for pre-operative isolation is vital. Furthermore, consideration of patient adherence and satisfaction is key in deciding which guideline will be most effective.

Indexed as

Preoperative CareSARS-CoV-2Cohort StudiesCOVID-19Elective Surgical ProceduresHumansPatient SatisfactionQuarantineRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTime FactorsCOVID-19elective surgerygeneral surgerypandemicpre-operative isolation

Identifiers

PMID34323145
PMCPMC10450714
OpenAlexW3183463411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.