ArticleCureus2025
From History to Plan: A Comprehensive Audit of Admission Documentation Practices in the Pulmonology Department at Medical Teaching Institute (MTI) Mardan Medical Complex, Pakistan.
Article in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Accurate admission documentation is essential for safe and effective clinical care. It facilitates diagnosis, treatment planning, team communication, legal protection, and quality improvement. However, audits globally, including in low-resource settings, report major gaps in documentation quality, which may jeopardize patient outcomes and healthcare operations. Objective The objective of this study is to assess the quality and completeness of admission documentation in the Pulmonology Unit of MTI Mardan Medical Complex (MMC), Pakistan, against national and international standards. Methods This retrospective clinical audit reviewed 150 systematically selected patient admission records from January 1 to March 31, 2025. A structured audit tool, based on NHS and institutional guidelines, evaluated key documentation domains: demographics, history, examination, investigations, diagnosis, and initial management. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics in Microsoft Excel. Results Only 1% (n = 1) of admission notes met all documentation standards. While demographics like name and age were documented in over 95% (n ≈ 143-150) of records, critical components were frequently missing. Presenting complaints were noted in 93% (n = 140), but detailed symptom analysis appeared in only 35% (n = 52), and red flag symptoms in 35% (n = 52). Medication history, allergy status, and vaccination history were missing in nearly all charts (98-100% missing, n = 147-150). Physical examination findings and vital signs were poorly recorded (3-61% = n = 5 to 92). Investigations and differential diagnoses were documented in less than 11% (n < 17) of cases. While 75% (n = 113) of records included an initial management plan, communication with patients or families was not documented in any case (0%, n = 0). Conclusion Significant documentation deficiencies were identified across multiple domains. Implementing a standardized admission template and conducting clinician training may improve compliance and patient care. Regular re-audits are recommended to assess ongoing progress.
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.