Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38084574›Full record

ArticleAnaesthesiology intensive therapy2023

WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and Anesthesia Equipment Checklist efficacy in war-affected low-resource settings: a prospective two-arm multicenter study.

Kateryna Bielka, Iurii Kuchyn, Michael Frank, Ihor Sirenko, Uliana Kashchii, Artem Yurovich, Hanna Fomina, Ivan Lisnyy, Nataliia Semenko

Open access · diamondAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Anaesthesiology intensive therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Global Surgery: The Challenges and Strategies to Win a War That Must Be Won.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kateryna BielkaDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Iurii KuchynDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Michael FrankDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Ihor SirenkoDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Uliana KashchiiDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Artem YurovichMukachevo Central District Hospital (St. Martin Hospital), Mukachevo, Ukraine.
Hanna FominaDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Ivan LisnyyDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Nataliia SemenkoDepartment of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bogomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Bogomolets National Medical University · UAKyiv City Clinical Oncology Center · UAMukachevo State University · UANational Cancer Institute · UA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Russian invasion of Ukraine has caused huge damage to all medical infrastructure and impairs patient safety. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of implementation of the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and Anesthesia Equipment Checklist on patient outcomes and adherence to safety standards in low-resource settings, affected by an ongoing war. MATERIAL AND

methodsA prospective multicenter study was conducted in 6 large Ukrainian hospitals. The study was conducted in two phases: a control period, lasting five months, followed by a study period, when the two checklists (the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and Anesthetic Equipment Checklist) were introduced in the designated operating rooms. The primary outcomes were any major complications, including death, during 30 days after surgery.

resultsA total of 2237 surgical procedures were recorded - 1178 in the control group and 1059 in the intervention group. Major postoperative complications occurred in 82 (6.9%) patients in the control group and in 25 (2.4%) in the study group (OR = 0.32 [0.19-0.52], P < 0.001). The effect on the incidence of specific postoperative complications was statistically significant for the "surgical infection" (1.5% vs. 0.1%; OR = 0.31 [0.1-0.8], P = 0.01) and "reoperation" (1.7% vs. 0.5%; OR = 0.32 [0.1-0.8], P = 0.01) cate-gories as well as for the 30-day mortality (1.3% vs. 0.3%; OR = 0.35 [0.1-0.9], P = 0.03). Better adherence to basic WHO surgical safety recommendations was observed for every check mentioned in the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist ( P < 0.05).

conclusionsThe WHO Surgical Safety Checklist and the Anesthesia Equipment Checklist improve patient outcomes in war-affected low-resource settings.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaChecklistHumansOperating RoomsPatient SafetyPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesWorld Health Organizationpatient safetysurgical checklistwar-affected setting

Identifiers

PMID38084574
PMCPMC10691456
OpenAlexW4388678111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.