ArticleCureus2025
Audit of Nasal Bone Fracture Referrals to an ENT Hub: Timeliness of Review and Management.
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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNasal bone fractures (NBFs) are among the most common facial injuries and often require prompt evaluation and intervention to optimise functional and cosmetic outcomes. This audit evaluates the timeliness of review and management for patients referred to an ENT hub via email.
methodsA retrospective review was conducted of all referrals to the ENT hub email at Ulster Hospital, Dundonald, between January 1, 2022, and March 18, 2022. All suspected NBF referrals were included. Data on demographics, time intervals from injury to referral, referral to review, and time to manipulation of nasal bones (MNB) were collected.
resultsFifty-six referrals were identified (age range: 7-89 years). All patients were contacted via telephone triage, which reduced clinic attendances by 39%. Ninety-three percent of referrals were received within seven days of injury; however, only 63% were contacted within seven days of referral. Of the 34 patients reviewed in clinic, 82% were seen within two weeks of injury. Nineteen patients underwent MNB, with 68% receiving intervention within 14 days. All three paediatric patients requiring MNB were managed outside the 14-day window due to theatre delays.
conclusionTelephone triage effectively reduced unnecessary clinic reviews, but delays in contacting patients, particularly paediatric cases, affected timely management. Earlier in-clinic review for children, better communication strategies, and ensuring accurate referral information may improve service delivery.
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.