ArticleCureus2025
Printed vs. Digital Patient Information Leaflets-Improving Patient Information Delivery for Enhanced Engagement in Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery: A Quality Improvement Project.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bridging the Communication Gap: Comparing Digital Tools and Traditional Methods in Post-Extraction Care Delivery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The Green Surgery Report, endorsed by the Royal College of Surgeons of England, states that improving the quality of patient care goes hand in hand with sustainability. Patients arriving at the fracture clinic are regularly provided with printed patient information leaflets (PILs) as part of their ongoing care. Current digital technology enables the use of sustainable forms of patient information, such as quick response (QR) codes and digital records. This quality improvement project explored the sustainability potential of improving patient accessibility to information through the use of digital technology. Methods Two prospective Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were carried out from July to October 2024. All patients arriving at the fracture clinic of the Leicester Royal Infirmary were included. Novel questionnaires were used to assess patient experience in receiving PILs in both digital and print forms. Change was introduced by creating QR codes for relevant PILs. Patient preference, cost analysis, and impact on carbon footprint were evaluated. Results In the first cycle with 50 patients, only 31 (62%) reported reading the paper or printed information leaflets, and 38 (76%) preferred receiving information in a digital form or via a QR code. All patients aged ≥80 years preferred printed information, while patients in the age range of 15-65 years predominantly preferred digital information. Following the implementation of QR codes in the second cycle, which included 20 patients, 16 (80%) found it easier to access and save digital PILs for future reference. A cost-effectiveness analysis revealed an estimated annual cost saving of £1600 and a reduction in CO
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.