ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2026
Optimized Nursing Management for Ophthalmic Surgical Instruments: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To examine associations between an optimized nursing management model and instrument workflow, quality-related outcomes, and direct expenditure in ophthalmic surgery. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included 2422 procedures managed conventionally in 2022 (n = 1201) and under the optimized model in 2023 (n = 1221). The optimized model combined barcode-based traceability, standardized processing procedures, and periodic staff training. Adjusted analyses used regression models for continuous, ordinal, and binary outcomes and segmented interrupted time-series regression for monthly expenditure. Results: The optimized period was associated with shorter preparation time (adjusted mean difference, -1.533 min; 95% CI, -1.925 to -1.140; P < 0.001), higher timeliness scores (adjusted proportional OR, 1.430; 95% CI, 1.240-1.649; P < 0.001), and higher labeling clarity scores (adjusted proportional OR, 1.739; 95% CI, 1.505-2.009; P < 0.001). In exploratory analyses, packaging errors (adjusted RR, 0.592; 95% CI, 0.367-0.956; P = 0.032), surgical delays (adjusted RR, 0.737; 95% CI, 0.572-0.951; P = 0.019), and recorded instrument-related process events (adjusted RR, 0.442; 95% CI, 0.225-0.870; P = 0.018) were less frequent, whereas cleaning qualification was slightly higher (adjusted RR, 1.020; 95% CI, 1.001-1.039; P = 0.035). Interrupted time-series analysis showed an immediate reduction in monthly direct damage-related expenditure at the period transition (coefficient, -15,550.200 CNY; 95% CI, -26,116.910 to -4983.491; P = 0.006), with no clear slope change. Conclusion: The optimized nursing management model was associated with improved instrument workflow, lower recorded instrument damage burden, and lower direct damage-related expenditure. Damage and loss measures lacked use-based exposure denominators, and secular confounding cannot be excluded. Structured traceability may support organizational quality assurance and operational risk control, but effects on patient safety require direct evaluation in multicenter prospective studies.
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.