ReviewAnaesthesiology intensive therapy2021
Interdisciplinary teamwork for chest tube insertion and management: an integrative review.
Review in Anaesthesiology intensive therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of breathing relaxation exercises on pain due to chest tube removal: a systematic review-meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of virtual reality on chest tube removal pain management in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: a randomized clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Nursing care for adult patients with chest drainage: a scoping review.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2024Article
- Development and validation of the first performance assessment scale for interdisciplinary chest tube insertion: a prospective multicenter study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Thoracostomy requires interdisciplinary teamwork. Even though thoracic drainage is a technical surgical procedure, nurses play an important role with major responsibilities during the procedure. This literature review aimed to identify articles related to the interdisciplinary management of thoracostomy. An integrative literature analysis between 2012 and 2019 with a qualitative approach was conducted. An analysis of articles written in English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish was conducted. A search of the PubMed and SCIELO databases was performed using combinations of the terms "Chest Tube; Nursing; Care; Drainage; Insertion". The search terms were included in 11,277 articles. After excluding articles that did not meet the objective of our study, 475 abstracts were analysed. Finally, 19 articles were selected with content focused on nursing care, content related to surgical procedures, and interdisciplinary content. Themes included the following: description of the procedure, interdisciplinary action, quality of the procedure, use of protocols for patient safety, and new technologies. In conclusion, interdisciplinary courses should be encouraged to improve interprofessional teamwork organization. Notwithstanding all these publications, the literature was fragmented into disciplines and isolated analyses. Each medical or nursing discipline addressed the aspects that pertain to its own responsibilities in the execution of the procedure. This review highlighted the need to develop interdisciplinary research and brought a source of rich information that can instrumentalize the creation of optimized processes for the interdisciplinary chest tube insertion.
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.