ArticleOman medical journal2022
Incorporation of Evidence-based Guidelines on Bleeding Risk Assessment Prior to Surgery into Practice: Real-time Experience.
Article in Oman medical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Despite guidelines recommending no need for coagulation testing before surgeries when a history of bleeding is negative, surgeons still overuse it in this part of the world. We aim to measure unbiased estimates of hemostatic outcomes in ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeries and assess the surgeons' behavior of preoperative coagulation testing. Methods: We enrolled all patients who underwent ENT surgeries from July 2017 to January 2018. The primary outcome was postoperative bleeding. Surgeons were asked about their decision on history alone or doing coagulation testing and their reason. Results: We recruited 730 patients; 372 were interviewed for a challenging bleeding history alone (group 1), and 358 had preoperative coagulation testing (group 2). Coagulation testing was repeated twice or more in 55.0% of patients, and more than half had coagulation factor and Von Willebrand factor assays. Most surgeons performed coagulation testing because of habitual practice. Conclusions: Almost half of the local surgeons consider coagulation testing as standard to evaluate bleeding risk before surgical procedures. This resulted in unnecessary delays in surgeries, parent/patient anxiety, and additional total cost. We recommend awareness campaigns for surgeons and the involvement of surgical societies to adhere to guidelines of detailed hemostatic history.
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.