Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36216375›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2022

Development, implementation and evaluation of high-quality virtual preoperative anaesthetic assessment during COVID-19 and beyond: a quality improvement report.

Petar Popivanov, Sohail Bampoe, Terry Tan, Paul Rafferty

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open quality, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Petar PopivanovDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Coombe Women and Infants University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland ppopivanov@coombe.ie.ORCID 0000-0001-7840-3860
Sohail BampoeUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Terry TanDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Coombe Women and Infants University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Paul RaffertyFaculty of Leadership and Quality in Healthcare, Royal College of Physicians of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Coombe Women & Infants University Hospital · IERoyal College of Physicians of Ireland · IEUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreoperative risk factor identification and optimisation are widely accepted as the gold standard of care for elective surgery and are essential for reducing morbidity and mortality. COVID-19 public health restrictions required a careful balance between ensuring best medical practices and maintaining safety by minimising patient face-to-face attendance in the hospital. Based on the successful implementation of telemedicine (TM) in other medical specialties and its feasibility in the preoperative context, this study aimed to develop, implement and evaluate a high-quality virtual preoperative anaesthetic assessment process.

methodsThe three-step model for improvement was used. The specific, measurable, actionable, relevant, time aim (step 1) and measures for improvement (step 2) were defined at the onset of the project. The plan-do-study-act tool was used for the structured implementation of improvement interventions (step 3) in three phases. Data relating to virtual and in-person referrals, assessments, did-not-attend (DNA) rate, consultation time, day of surgery delays and cancellations, and service-user and provider experience surveys were recorded prospectively.

resultsA total of 2805 patients were assessed in the preoperative anaesthetic assessment clinic between July 2020 and March 2021. The mean rate of virtual preoperative assessments was 50% (SD ±10) (1390/2805). 0.1% (30/2805) were inappropriately referred on the alternative pathway. The DNA rate was 0.4% (8/1398) and 3% (43/1458) for virtual and in-person pathways, respectively. The mean consultation times for virtual and in-person attendance were 19 (SD ±7) and 31 (SD ±13) min, respectively. There were five same-day surgery cancellations and one delay due to medical reasons. When asked about their experience with the virtual assessment, both service users and providers reported high satisfaction, minimal technical difficulties and shared concerns about limited opportunities for physical examination.

conclusionThis is one of the first implementational studies to comprehensively outline the feasibility of TM in preoperative anaesthetic assessment during COVID-19.

Indexed as

AnestheticsCOVID-19TelemedicineAmbulatory Care FacilitiesHumansQuality ImprovementAnestheticsAnaesthesiaCOVID-19Quality improvementQuality improvement methodologiesTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID36216375
PMCPMC9556744
OpenAlexW4304080342

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.