Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35767060›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2022

A standardized marking procedure for ENT operations to prevent wrong-site surgery: development, establishment and subsequent evaluation among patients and medical personnel.

Christian Rohrmeier, Narmeen Abudan Al-Masry, Rainer Keerl, Christopher Bohr, Steffen Mueller

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Christian RohrmeierFaculty of Medicine, University of Regensburg, 93042, Regensburg, Germany. christian.rohrmeier@ukr.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3339-5382
Narmeen Abudan Al-MasryDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, St. Elisabeth Hospital, St.-Elisabeth-Str. 23, 94315, Straubing, Germany.
Rainer KeerlDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, St. Elisabeth Hospital, St.-Elisabeth-Str. 23, 94315, Straubing, Germany.
Christopher BohrDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, University of Regensburg, 93042, Regensburg, Germany.
Steffen MuellerDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Regensburg, 93042, Regensburg, Germany.
University of Regensburg · DEChristian Aid · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWrong-site surgeries are rare but potentially serious clinical errors. Marking the surgical site is crucial to preventing errors, but is hindered in the ENT field by the presence of many internal organs. In addition, there is no standardized marking procedure.

methodsHere, an ENT surgical-marking procedure was developed and introduced at a clinic. The procedure was evaluated through anonymized questionnaires. This study was conducted over a 6-month period by interviewing patients and, at the beginning and end of this period, doctors and other surgical staff.

resultsThe internal organ-marking problem was solved by applying a fixed abbreviation for each procedure onto the shoulder in addition to marking the skin surface as close to the organ as possible. The procedure was described as practicable by 100% of the interviewees; 75% of the ENT physicians and 96.3% of the other surgical staff considered the procedure highly important for preventing site confusion, and 75% of the physicians had a consequently greater feeling of safety. Of the 248 patients surveyed, 96.0% considered the marking procedure useful, and 75.8% had a consequently greater feeling of safety. For 52.0%, the marking reduced their fear of the operation.

conclusionsFor the first time, a standardized procedure was developed to mark the site of ENT surgery directly, uniformly and safely on patients. The procedure was judged to be useful and practicable and was also deemed crucial for preventing site confusion. Patients felt safer and less fearful of the operation due to the marking.

Indexed as

Medical ErrorsOrthopedic ProceduresHealth PersonnelHumansChecklistMarking proceduresPatient safetyWrong-side surgeryWrong-site surgery

Identifiers

PMID35767060
PMCPMC9519680
OpenAlexW4283725155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.