ArticleCureus2024
Assessing and Improving the Documentation of Large-Volume Paracentesis Procedures in a Tertiary Hospital: A Quality Improvement Project.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inconsistent documentation of large-volume paracentesis (LVP) procedures in a tertiary hospital presents risks to patient safety and procedural quality. This study aimed to improve the completeness and accuracy of LVP documentation through the implementation of a structured checklist, developed in alignment with the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Safety Toolkit. The intervention was conducted over three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles and involved multidisciplinary collaboration, the integration of Local Safety Standards for Invasive Procedures (LocSSIPs) into the Clinical Record System (CRS), and targeted training for staff. Sample sizes across the cycles were 35, 34, and 35 participants, respectively. Significant improvements were achieved in key documentation metrics, encompassing pre-procedure, post-procedure by doctors, and post-procedure by nurses. The results demonstrate the efficacy of structured interventions in standardising procedural documentation, improving compliance, and enhancing patient safety within clinical practice.
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.