ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Patient-Reported Postoperative Pain and Numbness: Applications for Endoscopic vs. Microscopic Ear Surgery.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 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, 2 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transcanal endoscopic ear surgery (TEES) avoids a postauricular incision, which has been shown to minimize pain and numbness. Our objective is to assess how much patients value minimizing pain and numbness relative to other postoperative otologic outcomes. Methods: Cross-sectional anonymous surveys were distributed to otolaryngology clinic patients in a tertiary care center. Patients were instructed to rate how much they value various outcomes when undergoing hypothetical ear surgery on a scale of 0 (not important) to 10 (very important). Results: 102 patients responded. Ten percent of survey respondents were Spanish-speaking. Outcomes of the highest importance included hearing (mean 9.3; SD 1.9), staff friendliness (8.9; 1.8), numbness (8.3; 2.4), and pain (8.1; 2.5). Outcomes of moderate importance included time spent under anesthesia (7.0; 3.2), scar visibility (6.3; 3.5), incision size (5.5; 3.4), incision hidden in the ear canal (5.4, 3.9), and surgery cost to the hospital (5.1; 3.9). In linear regression analysis, increasing age was associated with decreased value placed on incision size (p < 0.001) and scar visibility (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients placed a high value on minimizing pain and numbness after ear surgery, nearly as much as a good hearing outcome. These patient-centric outcomes are important in justifying the minimally invasive approach of TEES.
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.