ArticleCureus2022
Quality of Documentation in Paediatric Supracondylar Fractures: A Quality Improvement Project.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Supracondylar fractures are the most common elbow fractures in children. Their documentation and management must be done fully and correctly. This Quality Improvement Project (QIP) assessed the quality of documentation for paediatric supracondylar fractures admitted, in accordance with the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST). Methods We present a case series of supracondylar fractures presenting to a single UK-based district general hospital from January 2018 - October 2021. We performed a quality improvement intervention starting in November 2020. The retrospective data prior to intervention (January 2018-November 2020) were deemed "pre-intervention". Prospective "post-intervention" data were collected from April to October 2021. After "pre-intervention" data analysis, an intervention in the form of a documentation proforma was developed and multidisciplinary teaching sessions were delivered. Post-intervention prospective data collection followed from April - October 2021. Results There were 48 and 26 patients in cycles one and two, respectively. The mean age was 6.4 (SD 3.5) and 6.5 (SD 2.7) years, respectively; 42/48 in cycle one and all 26/26 in cycle two required operative management. The mean time to surgery was 1.3 and 0.96 days, respectively. Post-intervention, cycle two showed a reduction in patients with "no neurovascular documentation" pre-reduction (17% vs 12%) and an increase in patients documented as having "neurovascular status intact" (NVI) (44% vs 69%). In post-operative documentation, there was an improvement in documentation with 73% of patients having a post-operative neurovascular assessment documented, versus 50% in the pre-intervention cohort. Conclusion This QIP provided some early improvement in the documentation but with room for future progress as the project continues. It showed proformas can be an effective tool in implementing positive change. It also highlights the need for continuous clinical education across the multidisciplinary teams managing trauma.
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.