ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Process Improvement of In-Hospital Critical and Life-Threatening Patient Resuscitation: A Quality Improvement Project in a China Otolaryngology Hospital.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo identify factors contributing to the low success rate of resuscitation, we optimized related links in resuscitation management and constructed a five-minute green transfer resuscitation model.
methodsA quasi-experimental pre-post quality improvement study was conducted on patients with critical and severe conditions admitted in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology at a China otolaryngology hospital. The pre-intervention group of patients were treated using the conventional resuscitation process, while the post-intervention group was treated using the "5 min green transfer" resuscitation process under the guidance of the quality improvement (QI) team.
resultsThe resuscitation mainly occurred in the first and second quarters, between 20:00 in the evening and 07:59 the following morning. In the pre-intervention group, the most common direct cause of initiating resuscitation was bleeding, primarily due to epistaxis, while the primary direct cause for initiating resuscitation was abnormal vital signs in the post-intervention group. The resuscitation success rate was 82.93% (34/41) in the pre-intervention group and 93.48% (43/46) in the post-intervention group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in resuscitation success rate (
conclusionsThe intervention significantly improved the 5 min transfer efficiency, which was conducive to ensuring timely medical intervention for patients and safeguarding their clinical safety.
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.