ArticleThe journal of international advanced otology2022
Safety of Otological Operating During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Prospective Audit of 1130 Cases from 79 Centers.
Article in The journal of international advanced otology, 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
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess compliance with guidance produced by the UK body representing all ENT Surgeons (ENT UK) and the British Society of Otology (BSO) on restarting otological surgery after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Safety was assessed by recording surgical complica- tions and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during this period.
methodsA prospective multicenter audit of otological surgery was conducted over a 12-week period, from June 15, 2020, to September 6, 2020.
resultsOne thousand one hundred thirty cases from 79 hospital sites across Great Britain were involved in the study; 91.1% were tested for SARS-CoV-2 pre-operatively, none of whom tested positive; 70.4% were isolated for 7-14 days prior to surgery; 28.2% of surgeons wore full personal protective equipment, compared with 66.6% of anesthetists and 68.2% of scrub staff. The endoscope was used in 75 (6.7%) of all proce- dures, operations were changed to be performed under local rather than a general anesthetic in 3 cases (0.3%) and the "double drape" to protect against aerosol was used in 321 (27.4%) of cases. Trainees were present in 80.3% of cases. Complications occurred in 4% of cases. No patients or staff contracted SARS-CoV-2 during the audit.
conclusionENT UK and BSO guidance was variably followed, with the highest compliance for the use of an FFP3 mask, a negative SARS-CoV-2 swab, and trainee presence in theater. Surgeons did not use full personal protective equipment as frequently as their anesthetic and scrub team colleagues. There were only minimal changes in surgical and anesthetic techniques. Otological operation after the first wave of the SARS- CoV-2 pandemic was performed safely with no reported COVID transmission or increase in major complications despite changes in operating practice.
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.