Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41214189›Full record

ReviewUrologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026

[Value of standard operating procedures (SOP) in the treatment of urological emergencies].

Frank Waldbillig, Maurice Stephan Michel

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Frank WaldbilligKlinik für Urologie & Urochirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Mannheim GmbH, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Deutschland. frank.waldbillig@umm.de.
Maurice Stephan MichelKlinik für Urologie & Urochirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Mannheim GmbH, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrological emergencies are often time-critical and require structured action. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) translate guidelines into concrete processes and can improve the quality of care.

methodsLiterature review on the effects of SOPs in urological emergency management.

resultsSOPs increase guideline adherence, shorten diagnosis and treatment times, and reduce morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay. Examples include "Code Torsion" for testicular torsion, sepsis bundles for urosepsis, and SOP checkboxes for priapism. National programs such as the British GIRFT initiative show that standardized SOPs reduce treatment variability and allow resources to be used more efficiently.

conclusionSOPs increase efficiency, safety, and structure in urological emergency care while also helping to relieve pressure on the healthcare system.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesPractice Guidelines as TopicUrologic DiseasesUrologyEmergenciesFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansMaleGuideline adherenceMorbidityPatient safetyQuality of careUrosepsis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.