ArticleBMC surgery2026
Research on the application of refined operating room turnover efficiency in cross-hospital operating room efficiency evaluation.
Article 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a refined evaluation system for operating room (OR) turnover efficiency that addresses challenges in inter-hospital comparisons arising from variations in surgical volume and specialty distribution.
methodsOperational data (including date, operating room, table sequence, surgical name, entry time, start time, end time, and exit time) from July to December 2023 were retrieved from the surgical information management system. A specialty-specific turnover efficiency metric was constructed by excluding the upper and lower 5% of outliers. Comparisons were performed among overall OR averages, specialty-specific averages, and the specialized turnover efficiencies using independent samples Student’s t-test (P < 0.05).
resultsAmong the nine specialties analyzed, six exhibited significantly higher average turnover times than the overall OR average, with no overlap in most cases. Statistically significant differences were observed between the specialized turnover efficiencies and the OR-wide averages (for example, breast surgery: t = − 10.315, P < 0.00001).
conclusionSpecialty-specific turnover efficiency provides a more accurate reflection of operating room performance than unadjusted overall averages and shows promise for cross-hospital benchmarking, pending multi-center validation. Future studies should investigate the root causes of delays and develop targeted improvement strategies.
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.