ArticleCureus2024
Evaluation and Improvement of the Quality of Surgical Operative Notes in the Department of General Surgery at Dongola Teaching Hospital, Sudan.
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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Beyond the Scalpel: Improving Operative Note Quality in Gabeet Specialized Hospital, Sudan.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Improving the Quality of Surgical Operative Notes at Managil Teaching Hospital, Sudan: A Clinical Audit.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Implementation of a Standardized Surgical Operative Note: A Clinical Audit at Atbara Teaching Hospital.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluating and Improving the Quality of Surgical Operative Notes at Elobeid Teaching Hospital: A Two-Phase Audit.Cureus · 2025Article
- Evaluating and Improving the Quality of Surgical Operative Notes at the Port Sudan Teaching Hospital.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.