ArticleCurrent medical science2025
Scoring the Clinical Application of a Novel Scale in a Hybrid Operating Room for Neurosurgery.
Article in Current medical science, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe lack of clarity regarding the application performance of a hybrid operating room (HOR) and the uncertainty of surgical scheduling often lead to its inefficient application. This study aimed to review the clinical application of our neurosurgical HOR and propose a scale to score cases clearly.
methodsWe reviewed the operating procedures and duration of stay in 1865 HOR cases. The actual procedures of each case were summarized into 5 application types, and numerical assignment was used to distinguish the dependence of each type on our HOR: surgical procedures combined with interventional procedures (4 points, the highest dependence), surgical procedures combined with imaging procedures (3 points), interventional procedures (2 points), imaging procedures (1 point), and surgical procedures (0 points, the lowest dependence).
resultsA novel scale that could score 1865 cases into those 5 grades was developed. The percentages by grade were as follows: 4 points, 4.24%; 3 points, 4.88%; 2 points, 20.75%; 1 point, 69.38%; and 0 points, 0.75%. The cumulative usage time was 4241.9 h, the duration of which was as follows: 4 points, 16.17%; 3 points, 15.50%; 2 points, 31.32%; 1 point, 35.62%; and 0 points, 1.39%.
conclusionsThe HOR serves as a multifunctional room to treat neurosurgical diseases. The scale helps to quickly prioritize cases that rely more on HOR, providing guidelines for surgical scheduling. Although our HOR is unsuitable for emergency cases, it clearly shows the application performance of our HOR to provide a reference for promoting its efficient application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40100554What 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.