ArticleWorld neurosurgery2022
Managing Traumatic Brain Injury During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic-A Case-Matched Controlled Analysis of Immediate Outcomes.
Article in World neurosurgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in emergency department visits for emergency care-sensitive conditions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide study in Korea, 2019-2021.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 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
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to compare their outcome with case-matched controls from the prepandemic phase.
methodsThis is a retrospective case-control study in which all patients with TBI admitted during COVID-19 pandemic phase (Arm A) from March 24, 2020 to November 30, 2020 were matched with age and Glasgow Coma Scale score-matched controls from the patients admitted before March 2020 (Arm B).
resultsThe total number of patients matched in each arm was 118. The length of hospital stay (8 days vs. 5 days; P < 0.001), transit time from emergency room to operation room (150 minutes vs. 97 minutes; P = 0.271), anesthesia induction time (75 minutes vs. 45 minutes; P = 0.002), and operative duration (275 minutes vs. 180 minutes; P = 0.002) were longer in arm A. Although the incidence of fever and pneumonia was significantly higher in arm A than in arm B (50% vs. 26.3%, P < 0.001 and 27.1% vs. 1.7%, P < 0.001, respectively), outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended) and mortality (18.6% vs. 14.4% respectively; P = 0.42) were similar in both the groups.
conclusionsThe outcome of the patients managed for TBI during the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to matched patients with TBI managed at our center before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding suggests that the guidelines followed during the COVID-19 pandemic were effective in dealing with patients with TBI. This model can serve as a guide for any future pandemic waves for effective management of patients with TBI without compromising their outcome.
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.