ArticleJB & JS open access
Increasing Quality and Frequency of Goals-of-Care Documentation in the Highest-Risk Surgical Candidates: One-Year Results of the Surgical Pause Program.
Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating 'what matters' conversations into preoperative care: a qualitative evaluation of surgical team workflows and barriers.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Six years of a clinical communication intervention in shared decision-making to promote documentation of goals of care for critically ill patients with a life-limiting illness.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
- Risk Analysis Index for Estimation of 30-Day Postoperative Mortality in Hip Fractures.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Agreement Between Provider-Completed and Patient-Completed Preoperative Frailty Screening Using the Clinical Risk Analysis Index: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2025Article
- Preoperative diagnosis of frailty.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient values may be obscured when decisions are made under the circumstances of constrained time and limited counseling. The objective of this study was to determine if a multidisciplinary review aimed at ensuring goal-concordant treatment and perioperative risk assessment in high-risk orthopaedic trauma patients would increase the quality and frequency of goals-of-care documentation without increasing the rate of adverse events. Methods: We prospectively analyzed a longitudinal cohort of adult patients treated for traumatic orthopaedic injuries that were neither life- nor limb-threatening between January 1, 2020, and July 1, 2021. A rapid multidisciplinary review termed a "surgical pause" (SP) was available to those who were ≥80 years old, were nonambulatory or had minimal ambulation at baseline, and/or resided in a skilled nursing facility, as well as upon clinician request. Metrics analyzed include the proportion and quality of goals-of-care documentation, rate of return to the hospital, complications, length of stay, and mortality. Statistical analysis utilized the Kruskal-Wallis rank and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables and the likelihood-ratio chi-square test for categorical variables. Results: A total of 133 patients were either eligible for the SP or referred by a clinician. Compared with SP-eligible patients who did not undergo an SP, patients who underwent an SP more frequently had goals-of-care notes identified (92.4% versus 75.0%, p = 0.014) and recorded in the appropriate location (71.2% versus 27.5%, p < 0.001), and the notes were more often of high quality (77.3% versus 45.0%, p < 0.001). Mortality rates were nominally higher among SP patients, but these differences were not significant (10.6% versus 5.0%, 5.1% versus 0.0%, and 14.3% versus 7.9% for in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality, respectively; p > 0.08 for all). Conclusions: The pilot program indicated that an SP is a feasible and effective means of increasing the quality and frequency of goals-of-care documentation in high-risk operative candidates whose traumatic orthopaedic injuries are neither life- nor limb-threatening. This multidisciplinary program aims for goal-concordant treatment plans that minimize modifiable perioperative risks. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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.