ArticleCureus2024
The Impact of COVID-19 on Cholesteatoma Diagnosis and Treatment.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis investigation aimed to examine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on treatment delays and the severity of initial disease presentation in cholesteatoma patients treated in the prepandemic and pandemic periods.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was of patients who underwent primary surgical management of cholesteatoma between October 2018 and December 2021, split between the prepandemic (October 2018 to February 2020) and pandemic (April 2020 to December 2021) time periods. Data collected included time from referral to otology clinic visit, time of diagnosis, and time of surgical interventions. The extent of cholesteatoma disease and surgery, hearing loss levels, and the need for additional surgical intervention were also considered. The datasets were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.
resultsEighty-six patients met inclusion criteria, 36 of whom were treated prepandemic and 50 after March 2020. Of the examined variables, only time from diagnosis to surgery and case duration were significantly different between the two cohorts, with the pandemic cohort experiencing less time between initial diagnosis and surgery (51.4 days prepandemic vs. 38.4 days pandemic, p = 0.02) and shorter case duration (221.0 minutes prepandemic vs. 171.8 minutes pandemic, p = 0.0008). There was no difference between the severity of presentation in the prepandemic and pandemic populations.
conclusionsThere was no significant difference in disease severity or delays in treatment when comparing the prepandemic to the pandemic population. There was a quicker time from referral to surgery and decreased surgical times during the pandemic.
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.