Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39493011›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Evaluation and Improvement of the Quality of Surgical Operative Notes in the Department of General Surgery at Dongola Teaching Hospital, Sudan.

Osama Elhadi Bakheet, Abubakr Muhammed, Ahmed Mohamed, Salih Ahmed Abdalla Ahmed, Abdalrahman Abdalhalim Abdalrahman Ali, Ahmed Salah Ahmed Sayed, Nada Hassan Farah Hassan, Mohammed Eltayeb Elnour Elawad, Mohammed Khalid Mohammedali Abdelrhman, Ayman Adil Eltayeb Abdelnour

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

10 authors.

Osama Elhadi BakheetGeneral Surgery, Dongola Teaching Hospital, Dongola, SDN.
Abubakr MuhammedGeneral Surgery, University of Gezira, Wad Madani, SDN.
Ahmed MohamedOrthopaedics and Trauma, Gezira Centre for Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Wad Madani, SDN.
Salih Ahmed Abdalla AhmedGeneral Surgery, Dongola Teaching Hospital, Dongola, SDN.
Abdalrahman Abdalhalim Abdalrahman AliGeneral Surgery, Dongola Teaching Hospital, Dongola, SDN.
Ahmed Salah Ahmed SayedGeneral Surgery, Dongola Teaching Hospital, Dongola, SDN.
Nada Hassan Farah HassanGeneral Surgery, Dongola Teaching Hospital, Dongola, SDN.
Mohammed Eltayeb Elnour ElawadGeneral Surgery, Wad Madani College of Medical Sciences and Technology, Wad Madani, SDN.
Mohammed Khalid Mohammedali AbdelrhmanGeneral Surgery, Wad Madani College of Medical Sciences and Technology, Wad Madani, SDN.
Ayman Adil Eltayeb AbdelnourGeneral Surgery, University of Gezira, Wad Madani, SDN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Surgical operative notes are essential for patient care and legal documentation. However, inconsistencies in the quality of these notes at Dongola Teaching Hospital, Sudan, highlighted the need for improvement. In line with guidelines from the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSEng), this study aimed to enhance the documentation practices in the hospital by implementing a standardized format. Methods A retrospective audit was conducted over three months at the General Surgery Department of Dongola Training Hospital. In the first audit cycle, 81 surgical notes were assessed, revealing significant deficiencies in adherence to RCSEng standards. An intervention was introduced, including a standardized template, training for surgeons, and widespread dissemination of the new format. A second audit cycle followed to assess improvements. Results In the first audit cycle, adherence to documentation standards was 50.3%, with missing or incomplete information in key areas. After the intervention, adherence improved to 71.9%. Notable improvements included documentation of extra procedures (18% to 100%), prosthesis details (0% to 100%), and antibiotic prophylaxis (71% to 97%). However, a slight decline was observed in postoperative care instructions, dropping from 100% to 90%. Conclusion The introduction of a standardized template and training significantly improved the quality of surgical documentation. Continuous efforts are necessary to maintain these improvements, particularly in areas where adherence remains suboptimal, such as postoperative care instructions.

Indexed as

clinical documentation auditquality improvement (qi)royal college of surgeonssurgery generalsurgical notes

Identifiers

PMID39493011
PMCPMC11530359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.