Observational studyBMJ open2025
Comparison of elective hemicolectomy patients before and after establishment of a preoperative anaesthesia assessment clinic: a retrospective, observational study in a hospital in Norway.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05520229 (The Evaluation of a Preoperative Anaesthesia Assessment Clinic on Elective Patients After Partial Excision of the Intestine), which is not on this 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.
The Evaluation of a Preoperative Anaesthesia Assessment Clinic on Elective Patients After Partial Excision of the Intestine
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare outcome data of hemicolectomy patients before and after the establishment of a preoperative anaesthesia assessment clinic (PAC).
designThis observational study was conducted retrospectively through an electronic health record review covering periods before (2014-2017) and after (2017-2022) the PAC was established.
settingAn acute care hospital in Norway.
participantsA total of 612 patients undergoing elective open or laparoscopic hemicolectomy were included, of whom 338 (55.2%) had attended the PAC. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the rate of cancellation of planned surgeries, and the secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay (LOS), unanticipated intraoperative anaesthesia-related events and the presence of documentation relevant to the planning of anaesthesia in the patient's medical records preoperatively.
resultsCompared with the after-PAC cohort, the before-PAC cohort was numerically more likely to have their planned surgery cancelled (OR=1.97, 95% CI (0.84 to 4.61); p=0.12). The before-PAC cohort also had a numerically lower rate of unanticipated intraoperative anaesthesia-related events (18.6%) than the after-PAC cohort (22.5%; p=0.240). However, neither of these differences was statistically significant. Median LOS was significantly shorter in the after-PAC cohort (4.79 days, IQR (3.80-6.12)) than in the before-PAC cohort (5.16 days (4.09-7.18); p=0.001). Moreover, the presence of documentation relevant to the planned anaesthesia in the medical records was significantly more common for after-PAC patients.
conclusionsThe establishment of the PAC reduced the rate of planned surgery cancellations but increased the rate of recorded intraoperative anaesthesia events. Patients who attended the PAC had a significantly shorter LOS and more anaesthesia-related information in their medical records. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05520229.
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.