ReviewFrontiers in surgery2025
Exploring the role of trained surgical care nurses in cricothyrotomy and other emergency procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent pressure-controlled ureteral access sheath: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- Addressing limitations of previous meta-analyses of uniportal versus biportal endoscopic lumbar surgery: an umbrella review and de-duplicated, pathology-stratified meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is a severe shortage of healthcare professionals, emphasized in a stark manner by the recent COVID-19 pandemic, where the mortality rate was primarily a consequence of medical professionals lacking the technical know-how for conducting specialized procedures. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the success rates of nurse-performed emergency surgeries, focusing on trauma care (e.g., cricothyrotomy), rural obstetric emergencies (e.g., caesarean section, hysterectomy), and general procedures (e.g., laparotomy, appendectomy). Methods: A systematic search was conducted across eight major databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, ProQuest) following PRISMA guidelines. Four eligible studies were identified, and data were pooled using a fixed-effects model. Results: The synthesis of data across the four selected studies revealed a pooled relative risk (RR) of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78, 1.00) and odds ratio (OR) of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.65, 0.99) about the efficacy in emergency surgeries conducted by nurses. These four studies were the only ones meeting our strict inclusion criteria of reporting outcome data on nurse-performed emergency procedures. An analysis of heterogeneity demonstrated minimal variability among the studies, with a Chi Conclusion: This study suggests that trained nurses can safely and effectively perform selected emergency surgical procedures. While encouraging, the limited number of studies highlights the need for further research to confirm these findings and guide clinical practice.
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.