Observational studyRevista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social2023
[Comparative analysis of bleed volume with visual technique].
Observational study in Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 2023. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Blood loss estimation in a surgery is made by anesthesiologists by means of visual technique, which is not reliable because it can change depending on the judgement of every person, or his/her work experience, which is why it is considered something subjective. Therefore, the results obtained could lead to make mistakes with the exact amount of bleeding, mismanaging unnecessary hemoderived transfusions or administering unnecessary drugs. Objective: To compare the blood volume and its visual calculation between Anesthesiology residents and anesthesiologists. Material and methods: Prolective cross-sectional study which included 85 Anesthesiology residents and anesthesiologists. Diverse scenarios of bleeding were set, divided into gauze pads, compresses and jars, and each participant was asked to answer the poll. Results: There is no significant difference in the estimate of bleeding between the estimation made by residents and anesthesiologists. Conclusions: The grade of studies or experience is not significant for the exact estimation of bleeding with visual technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38016078PMC10776178What 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.