ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Elevating orthopedic documentation: a clinical audit of orthopaedic operative note quality against RCSE and BOA standards.
Article in Frontiers in 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The main aim of this audit was to measure the performance of the orthopedic Operating Theatre (OT) notes as compared to the standards laid down by the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSE), British Orthopedic Association (BOA) and their collaborators. Methods: This single-cycle audit was conducted in the Department of Orthopaedics of a tertiary care hospital. One hundred randomly selected orthopaedic operative theatre notes from January-June 2023 were assessed against RCSE and BOA documentation standards. Following identification of deficiencies, targeted interventions were implemented between July-October 2023, comprising a standardised documentation template and a staff training programme. A re-audit of 100 notes was subsequently performed from October 2023-March 2024 to evaluate the impact of these interventions. Domain-specific compliance rates were compared between cycles using the chi-square test. Results: Baseline audit identified deficiencies across four documentation domains: patient identification (72%), intraoperative findings (65%), postoperative plan (58%), and surgeon details (70%). Following the intervention programme, re-audit demonstrated significant improvements in all domains: patient identification (95%, Conclusion: A single audit cycle with targeted training and a standardised template produced statistically significant improvements across all RCSE/BOA documentation domains. Incorporating operative note training into routine induction programmes for rotating staff is recommended to sustain these gains.
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.