Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37953532›Full record

Trial reportMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2023

Enhanced Patient Comfort and Satisfaction with Early Oral Feeding after Thoracoscopic Lung Cancer Resection.

Yinghong Wu, Huiling Liu, Minghao Zhong, Xiyi Chen, Zhiqiong Ba, Guibin Qiao, Jiejie Feng, Xiuqun Zeng

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Errate: Enhanced Patient Comfort and Satisfaction with Early Oral Feeding after Thoracoscopic Lung Cancer Resection.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yinghong WuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Huiling LiuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Minghao ZhongDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Xiyi ChenDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Zhiqiong BaDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Guibin QiaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Jiejie FengDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Xiuqun ZengDepartment of Gynecology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital · CNGuangdong Academy of Medical Sciences · CNSouthern Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND The study aimed to compare the patient-reported outcomes in patients who underwent early vs conventional feeding after thoracoscopic lung cancer resection. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study enrolled 211 patients who underwent thoracoscopic lung cancer resection at a tertiary hospital between July 2021 and July 2022. Patients were randomly assigned to the conventional group or the early feeding group. There were 106 patients in the early feeding group and 105 patients in the conventional group. The conventional group received water 4 h after extubation and liquid/semi-liquid food 6 h after extubation. In contrast, the early feeding group received water 1 h after extubation and liquid/semi-liquid food 2 h after extubation. The primary outcomes were the degree of hunger, thirst, nausea, and vomiting. The secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and chest tube drainage. RESULTS No differences were found between the 2 groups in the degrees of postoperative nausea, vomiting, or pain after extubation for 1, 2, 4, and 8 h. Postoperative complications, duration of chest tube drainage, and duration of hospital stay were also similar (P=0.567, P=0.783, P=0.696). However, the hunger and thirst scores after extubation for 2 h and 4 h decreased and were lower in the early feeding group (both P<0.001). No patients developed choking, postoperative aspiration, gastrointestinal obstruction, or other complications. CONCLUSIONS Early oral feeding after thoracoscopic lung cancer resection is safe and can increase patient comfort postoperatively.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsHumansLength of StayPatient ComfortPatient SatisfactionPersonal SatisfactionPostoperative Nausea and VomitingWaterWater

Identifiers

PMID37953532
PMCPMC10655458
OpenAlexW4387253262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.