ArticleCureus2026
Patient-Reported Experience Across the Preoperative Ambulatory Trauma Pathway: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study in a UK District General Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Ambulatory trauma pathways manage a substantial proportion of operative orthopedic trauma, yet patient experience across these pathways is poorly characterized. This study aimed to describe patient-reported experience across two preoperative pathway domains, the ED attendance and the home-waiting interval, and to identify operational factors associated with poor experience. Methods This prospective survey included 65 consecutive adult ambulatory trauma patients at a UK district general hospital (October to December 2023). Patients rated their ED and home-waiting experience on a five-point Likert scale before planned surgery. Operational pathway metrics were captured prospectively via a digital handover platform and linked to experience scores. Low (≤3/5) and high (>3/5) experience groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Factors associated with low home-waiting experience were examined by logistic regression. All analyses were exploratory. Results Sixty-five patients were included (median age, 50 years; 60 (92%) self-presented; 50 (77%) were first assessed by an emergency nurse practitioner). Patients rating their ED experience as low (≤3/5; n = 22) had waited longer for first clinician review than those rating it as high (n = 43): median 91 vs. 31 minutes (p < 0.001) and had a longer total ED stay (5.4 vs. 4.0 hours, p = 0.027), whereas time to triage did not differ (p = 0.97). Patients reporting low home-waiting experience (27/65, 42%) had a longer ED-to-surgery interval (median 7 vs. 3 days, p = 0.018) and more operative cancellations (p < 0.001); 21 (32%) experienced at least one cancellation, with dissatisfaction rising from 27% among those never canceled to 75% among those canceled twice or more. On multivariable analysis, both a longer interval (adjusted OR, 3.31) and operative cancellation (adjusted OR, 4.91) were independently associated with low home-waiting experience. Forty-seven patients (72%) were uncertain about surgery timing, 13 (20%) received no red-flag advice, and only 17 (26%) had attempted to contact the trauma team during the home-waiting interval, with no dedicated contact route available; patients who had made contact reported a better home-waiting experience (p = 0.024). Conclusions Patient experience across the preoperative ambulatory trauma pathway was associated with time to first clinician review, total ED time, the ED-to-surgery interval, and operative cancellation, but not with triage speed or clinician grade. Uncertainty about surgery timing was the most prevalent problem. A structured preoperative communication package, including a dedicated point of contact, is a low-cost intervention that directly addresses the failures patients described.
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.