ArticleBJUI compass2022
Active involvement of nursing staff in reporting and grading complication-intervention events-Protocol and results of the CAMUS Pilot Nurse Delphi Study.
Article in BJUI compass, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The CAMUS Initiative: A Multiphase, Multicentre International Collaboration to Redefine Risk Stratification, Reporting, and Grading of Surgical Complications in Urology.European urology open science · 2026Article
- Evolution and Implications of the Novel CAMUS Reporting and Classification System: From Rationale to End Product.European urology open science · 2023Article
- Active involvement of nursing staff in reporting and grading complication-intervention events-Protocol and results of the CAMUS Pilot Nurse Delphi Study.BJUI compass · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study is to gain experienced nursing perspective on current and future complication reporting and grading in Urology, establish the CAMUS CCI and quality control the use of the Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) in nursing staff. Subjects and Methods: The 12-part REDCap-based Delphi survey was developed in conjunction with expert nurse, urologist and methodologist input. Certified local and international inpatient and outpatient nurses specialised in urology, perioperative nurses and urology-specific advanced practice nurses/nurse practitioners will be included. A minimum sample size of 250 participants is targeted. The survey assesses participant demographics, nursing experience and opinion on complication reporting and the proposed CAMUS reporting recommendations; grading of intervention events using the existing CDC and the proposed CAMUS Classification; and rating various clinical scenarios. Consensus will be defined as ≥75% agreement. If consensus is not reached, subsequent Delphi rounds will be performed under Steering Committee guidance. Results: Twenty participants completed the pilot survey. Median survey completion time was 58 min (IQR 40-67). The survey revealed that 85% of nursing participants believe nurses should be involved in future complication reporting and grading but currently have poor confidence and inadequate relevant background education. Overall, 100% of participants recognise the universal demand for reporting consensus and 75% hold a preference towards the CAMUS System. Limitations include variability in nursing experience, complexity of supplemental grades and survey duration. Conclusion: The integration of experienced nursing opinion and participation in complication reporting and grading systems in a modern and evolving hospital infrastructure may facilitate the assimilation of otherwise overlooked safety data. Incorporation of focused teaching into routine nursing education will be essential to ensure quality control and stimulate awareness of complication-related burden. This, in turn, has the potential to improve patient counselling and quality of care.
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.