Trial reportBMC surgery2026
Personalized tailoring position pads in spinal deformity correction surgery: a comparative study.
Trial report in BMC surgery, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of personalized tailoring position pads in spinal deformity correction surgery.
methodsThis randomized controlled study included 181 patients who underwent spinal deformity correction surgery between March 2022 and December 2024. The participants were randomly assigned to an observation group (n = 90) and a control group (n = 91). Regular prone-position positioning pads were used in the control group, while personalized tailoring position pads were utilized for the observation group. The effectiveness of both types of pads were assessed based on five parameters: positioning time; pad stability; incidence of skin injuries; occurrence of ocular complications; and satisfaction levels of both surgeons and anesthesiologists.
resultsThe positioning time in the observation group was significantly shorter than in the control group (6.18 ± 1.02 min vs. 11.51 ± 1.24 min, P < 0.001). Pad stability was better in the observation group compared to the control group (P < 0.001). The observation group experienced fewer intraoperative acquired pressure injuries (IAPIs) than the control group (P < 0.001): 23 cases of stage I IAPIs, 2 cases of stage II IAPIs and 1 case of suspected deep tissue injury in the observation group; 45 cases of stage I IAPIs, 6 cases of stage II IAPIs, and 4 cases of suspected deep tissue injuries in the control group. Ocular complication did not occur in either group. Surgeons and anesthesiologists reported higher levels of satisfaction in the observation group than the control group (P = 0.038, P = 0.027, respectively).
conclusionsPersonalized tailoring position pads in spinal deformity correction surgery were shown to be convenient with excellent stability. Furthermore, personalized tailoring position pads effectively reduced IAPIs and improved satisfaction among both surgeons and anesthesiologists.
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.