ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2023
Clinician preferences in the treatment of acutely symptomatic hernia: the 'MASH' survey.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management and outcomes in acute symptomatic hernias: a retrospective cohort study and review of cross-over to surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- EHS Guidelines on the Management of Primary Ventral and Incisional Hernias Under Emergency Conditions.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Review
- Emergency umbilical and epigastric hernia repair: nationwide registry-based study of long-term recurrence, mesh-related, and other complications.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Surgical practices in emergency umbilical hernia repair and implications for trial design.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
- Emergency umbilical hernia management: scoping review.BJS open · 2024Article
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 at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is limited high-quality evidence to guide the management of acute hernia presentation. The aim of this study was to survey surgeons to assess current trends in assessment, treatment strategy and operative decisions in the management of acutely symptomatic hernia.
methodsA survey was developed with reference to current guidelines, and reported according to Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys guidelines. Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Sheffield (UREC:034047). The survey explored practice in groin, umbilical/paraumbilical and incisional hernia presenting acutely. It captured respondent demographics, and preferences for investigations, treatment strategies and repair techniques for each hernia type, using a five-point Likert scale.
resultsSome 145 responses were received, of which 39 declared a specialist hernia practice. Essential investigations included urea and electrolytes (58.6%) and inflammatory markers (55.6%). Computed tomography scan of the abdomen was essential for assessment of incisional hernia (90.9%), but not for other hernia types. Bowel compromise drives early surgery, and increasing American Society of Anesthesiology score pushes towards non-operative management. Type of repair was driven by hernia contents, with increasing contamination associated with increased rates of suture repair. Where mesh was proposed in contaminated settings, biological types were preferred. There was variation in the potential use of laparoscopy for groin hernia.
conclusionsThis survey provides a snapshot of current trends in the management of acutely symptomatic hernia. It demonstrates variation across aspects of assessment and repair technique. Additional data are required to inform practice in these areas.
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.