ArticleActa ophthalmologica2022
Retinal surgery quality indicators for uncomplicated primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment without a national registry.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to evaluate the possibility of analysing quality indicators for uncomplicated primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment in a hospital department of ophthalmology without the support of a national registry or need to collect data from referring ophthalmological centres.
methodsIn 2014, we operated 231 consecutive eyes with uncomplicated retinal detachment. Our quality indicators were primary anatomical success, final anatomical success and postoperative endophthalmitis. We reviewed medical records in our university surgical department retrospectively and compared them with medical records from the regional hospitals that had referred most of the operated patients and done their own postoperative examination. Our hypothesis was that any retinal re-detachment and/or serious postoperative complication would be reported back.
resultsThe medical records at the surgical department revealed primary anatomic success for 91.3% of eyes and final anatomical success of 99.6%. The data from the regional hospitals confirmed that our hypothesis was correct. All patients with adverse outcomes were referred back for reoperation. Patients who were not referred again had an attached retina and showed no signs of endophthalmitis.
conclusionOur hypothesis that data in the surgical department's medical records would closely reflect those in referring hospitals was borne out. This supports, under current conditions, an effective strategy for analysing chosen quality indicators without relying on a national registry or reviewing records from regional hospitals.
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.