Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40065381›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2025

Key interventions and outcomes in perioperative care pathways in emergency laparotomy: a systematic review.

Deena P Harji, Ben Griffiths, Deborah Stocken, Rupert Pearse, Jane Blazeby, Julia M Brown

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2025. 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

6 authors.

Deena P HarjiManchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. d.harji@leeds.ac.uk.
Ben GriffithsManchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Deborah StockenClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Rupert PearseFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Jane BlazebyBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Julia M BrownClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR302532
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEmergency laparotomy (EmLap) is a complex clinical arena, delivering time-sensitive, definitive care to a high-risk patient cohort, with significant rates of post-operative morbidity and mortality. Embedding perioperative care pathways within this complex setting has the potential to improve post-operative outcomes, however, requires an in-depth understanding of their design, delivery and outcome assessment. Delivering and implementing complex interventions such as perioperative pathways require transparent reporting with detailed and indepth description of all components during the assessment and evaluation phase. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the current design and reporting of perioperative pathways in the EmLap setting.

methodsThe OVID SP versions of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched between January 1950 and December 2023. All randomised and non-randomised cohort studies reporting outcomes on perioperative care pathways in adult patients (> 18 years old) undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery were included. A narrative description of all perioperative pathways included was reported to identify design and description of the pathway including the delivery and timing of component interventions. All pathways were evaluated against the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.

resultsEleven RCTs and 19 non-randomised studies were identified, with most studies considered to be at moderate risk of bias. Twenty-six unique pathways were identified and described, delivering a total of 400 component interventions across 44,055 patients. Component interventions were classified into 24 domains across the perioperative pathway. Twenty studies (66.6%) did not report the TIDieR framework items, with thirteen studies reporting less than 50% of all items. Two hundred and fifty individual outcomes were reported across pathways, with the most commonly reported outcomes related to morbidity, mortality and length of stay.

conclusionCurrent perioperative pathways in EmLap setting are underpinned by variable component interventions, with a lack of in-depth intervention reporting and evaluation. Future studies should incorporate the TIDieR checklist when reporting on perioperative pathways in the EmLap setting. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysLaparotomyPerioperative CareHumansEmergency laparotomyEmergency surgeryPathways

Identifiers

PMID40065381
PMCPMC11892323

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.