Observational studyAORN journal2022
Strategies for Safely Maintaining Surgical Volume During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Study.
Observational study in AORN journal, 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Resuming elective surgeries that were canceled during the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a change to preprocedure patient preparation at a pediatric tertiary care center in middle Tennessee. We conducted a prospective, observational, mixed-methods study to determine the effectiveness of a preprocedure COVID-19 testing team to prevent COVID-19-related cancellations among pediatric patients receiving planned anesthesia. The intervention involved family member and patient education and a change in health record reporting to include COVID-19 test results. A team tasked with follow-up reviewed test results, consulted with families, and coordinated the administration of rapid tests if necessary. We compared preimplementation and postimplementation cancellation rates in four procedural areas and found no significant difference in the cancellation or rescheduling rates (P = .89, 95% confidence interval = -4.29 to 3.09). The team-based intervention was associated with the preservation of low procedural cancellation rates by mitigating barriers to preprocedural testing.
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.