ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2026
Exploring the Use of Instant Messaging Groups in the Postoperative Period for Pectus Excavatum Patients.
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a National Centre for Pectus Surgery, our department receives referrals from across England. To strengthen perioperative support for patients undergoing the Nuss procedure in the RESTORE Trial (August 2024-May 2025), individual WhatsApp groups were introduced, reflecting growing evidence of the value of text-based communication in surgical care. Fifty-two groups were established, each averaging 6.7 members, including patients, relatives, secretarial, and research staff. These groups facilitated direct communication with the clinical team. All conversations were anonymized prior to analysis. Groups averaged an exchange of 67 messages: 20 from clinicians, 19 from patients, and 17 from family or friends. Patients initiated 28% of conversations and family members 20%, most often regarding pain management. Clinicians shared an average of 7.2 images per group, and patients shared 4, typically related to wounds or chest appearance. Mean clinician response time was 94 min, with daily message averages of 2 from clinicians, 2.5 from patients, and 1.6 from family. All patients reported satisfaction and would recommend this communication method. Instant messaging provided an effective, responsive, and low-burden means of enhancing perioperative care and reassurance for Nuss patients.
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.