The importance of utilizing the SUPER reporting guideline for surgical technique.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tabbara MM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10170276 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The importance of utilizing the SUPER reporting guideline for surgical technique.
Tabbara Marina M MM Ciancio Gaetano G
Annals of translational medicine 20230221 8
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundExisting reporting guidelines pay insufficient attention to the detail and comprehensiveness reporting of surgical technique. The Surgical techniqUe rePorting chEcklist and standaRds (SUPER) aims to address this gap by defining reporting standards for surgical technique. The SUPER guideline intends to apply to articles that encompass surgical technique in any study design, surgical discipline, and stage of surgical innovation.MethodsFollowing the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network approach, 16 surgeons, journal editors, and methodologists reviewed existing reporting guidelines relating to surgical technique, reviewed papers from 15 top journals, and brainstormed to draft initial items for the SUPER. The initial items were revised through a three-round Delphi survey from 21 multidisciplinary Delphi panel experts from 13 countries and regions. The final SUPER items were formed after an online consensus meeting to resolve disagreements and a three-round wording refinement by all 16 SUPER working group members and five SUPER consultants.ResultsThe SUPER reporting guideline includes 22 items that are considered essential for good and informative surgical technique reporting. The items are divided into six sections: background, rationale, and objectives (items 1 to 5); preoperative preparations and requirements (items 6 to 9); surgical technique details (items 10 to 15); postoperative considerations and tasks (items 16 to 19); summary and prospect (items 20 and 21); and other information (item 22).ConclusionsThe SUPER reporting guideline has the potential to guide detailed, comprehensive, and transparent surgical technique reporting for surgeons. It may also assist journal editors, peer reviewers, systematic reviewers, and guideline developers in the evaluation of surgical technique papers and help practitioners to better understand and reproduce surgical technique.Trial registrationhttps://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-other-study-designs/#SUPER.
| S-EPMC10432285 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10316115 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10432295 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRevision total hip arthroplasty in cases with severe acetabular bone loss is challenging. In the presence of combined cavitary and segmental defects without superior acetabular coverage, reconstructions with a structural acetabular allograft protected by a cage or a custom-made triflange cage have been the treatment of choice. The current paper describes an impaction grafting into a mesh for uncontained defects in revision total hip arthroplasty.Description of techniqueAfter restoring containment with a mesh fixed with small fragment screws, defects were restored using impaction grafting combined with a cemented all-polyethylene cup.Patients and methodsFourteen consecutive acetabular impaction graftings were performed by two surgeons. All patients had a type 3B defect according to the Paprosky classification.ResultsNo re-revisions or radiographic failure was detected in the early follow-up period.ConclusionImpaction grafting into a mesh is an interesting treatment option to restore bone in combined cavitary and segmental defects.
| S-EPMC3772160 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) aims to promote high quality clinical guideline development and implementation. Guideline-based performance measures are a key implementation tool and are widely used internationally for quality improvement, quality assurance, and pay for performance in health care. There is, however, no international consensus on best methods for guideline-based performance measures. In order to address this issue, the G-I-N Performance Measures Working Group aimed to develop a set of consensus-based reporting standards for guideline-based performance measure development and re-evaluation.MethodsMethodology publications on guideline-based performance measures were identified from a systematic literature review and analyzed. Core criteria for the development and evaluation process of guideline-based performance measures were determined and refined into draft standards with an associated rationale and description of the evidence base. In a two-round Delphi-process, the group members appraised and approved the draft standards. After the first round, the group met to discuss comments and revised the drafts accordingly.ResultsTwenty-one methodology publications were reviewed. The group reached strong consensus on nine reporting standards concerning: (1) selection of clinical guidelines, (2) extraction of clinical guideline recommendations, (3) description of the measure development process, (4) measure appraisal, (5) measure specification, (6) description of the intended use of the measure, (7) measure testing/validating, (8) measure review/re-evaluation, and (9) composition of the measure development panel.ConclusionsThese proposed international reporting standards address core components of guideline-based performance measure development and re-evaluation. They are intended to contribute to international reporting harmonization and improvement of methods for performance measures. Further research is required regarding validity, acceptability, and practicality.
| S-EPMC4714427 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the impact of modifications to anatomical apical dissection including a puboprostatic open-collar technique, which visualizes the lateral aspect of the apex and dorsal vein complex (DVC) covering the rhabdosphincter while preserving the puboprostatic collar, on positive surgical margin (PSM) and continence recovery.MethodsOne-hundred-and-sixty-seven patients underwent gasless single-port retroperitoneoscopic radical prostatectomy using a three-dimensional head-mounted display system. Sequentially modified surgical techniques comprised puboprostatic open-collar technique, sutureless transection of the DVC, retrograde urethral dissection, and anterior reconstruction. The associations of these modifications with PSM and continence recovery were assessed.ResultsThe puboprostatic open-collar technique, sutureless DVC transection, and retrograde urethral dissection were significantly associated with lower apical PSM (P = 0.003, 0.003, and 0.010, respectively). The former two also showed similar associations in 84 patients with anterior apical tumor (P = 0.021 and 0.030, respectively). Among 92 patients undergoing all of these three procedures, overall and apical PSM rates were 13.0% and 3.3%, respectively. Retrograde urethral dissection (odds ratio [OR] 2.73, P = 0.004) together with nerve sparing (OR 2.77, P = 0.003) and anterior apical tumor (OR 0.45, P = 0.017) were independently associated with immediate continence recovery. A multivariable model for 3-month continence recovery included anterior apical tumor (OR 0.28, P = 0.003) and puboprostatic open-collar technique (OR 3.42, P = 0.062). Immediate and 3-month continence recovery rates were 56.3% and 85.4%, respectively, in 103 patients undergoing both the puboprostatic open-collar technique and retrograde urethral dissection.ConclusionNovel anatomical apical dissection utilizing a puboprostatic open-collar technique may favorably impact on both apical surgical margin and continence recovery.
| S-EPMC8049266 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Research priority setting with stakeholders can help direct the limited resources for health research toward priority areas of need. Ensuring transparency of the priority setting process can strengthen legitimacy and credibility for influencing the research agenda. This study aims to develop a reporting guideline for priority setting of health research. METHODS:We searched electronic databases and relevant websites for sources (frameworks, guidelines, or models for conducting, appraising, reporting or evaluating health research priority setting, and reviews (including systematic reviews)), and primary studies of research priority setting to July 2019. We inductively developed a list of reporting items and piloted the preliminary guideline with a diverse range of 30 priority setting studies from the records retrieved. RESULTS:From 21,556 records, we included 26 sources for the candidate REPRISE framework and 455 primary research studies. The REporting guideline for PRIority SEtting of health research (REPRISE) has 31 reporting items that cover 10 domains: context and scope, governance and team, framework for priority setting, stakeholders/participants, identification and collection of priorities, prioritization of research topics, output, evaluation and feedback, translation and implementation, and funding and conflict of interest. Each reporting item includes a descriptor and examples. CONCLUSIONS:The REPRISE guideline can facilitate comprehensive reporting of studies of research priority setting. Improved transparency in research priority setting may strengthen the acceptability and implementation of the research priorities identified, so that efforts and funding are invested in generating evidence that is of importance to all stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Not applicable.
| S-EPMC6935471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Experimental protocols are key when planning, performing and publishing research in many disciplines, especially in relation to the reporting of materials and methods. However, they vary in their content, structure and associated data elements. This article presents a guideline for describing key content for reporting experimental protocols in the domain of life sciences, together with the methodology followed in order to develop such guideline. As part of our work, we propose a checklist that contains 17 data elements that we consider fundamental to facilitate the execution of the protocol. These data elements are formally described in the SMART Protocols ontology. By providing guidance for the key content to be reported, we aim (1) to make it easier for authors to report experimental protocols with necessary and sufficient information that allow others to reproduce an experiment, (2) to promote consistency across laboratories by delivering an adaptable set of data elements, and (3) to make it easier for reviewers and editors to measure the quality of submitted manuscripts against an established criteria. Our checklist focuses on the content, what should be included. Rather than advocating a specific format for protocols in life sciences, the checklist includes a full description of the key data elements that facilitate the execution of the protocol.
| S-EPMC5978404 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Globally, the demand for qualitative research has risen, driven by the health sector's need for in-depth investigation of complex issues behind any phenomenon that may be inadequately comprehended and that other research methods cannot explore, uncover, or describe. The authors aimed to improve the accessibility and comprehensiveness of reporting guidelines for qualitative research. A comprehensive review of scientific articles was conducted on PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, and Embase, and it retrieved 1989 articles plus 13 more articles through the snowball method. After screening, 17 key articles were identified, which led to the development of Comprehensive Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research that comprises 14 categories, offering key elements in an organized table. This novel guideline complements the two widely used guidelines, Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research, by including additional aspects like objectives, existing knowledge, rationale behind methodologies, conclusions, recommendations, and reference citations. The study responds to the rising need for improved qualitative research reporting guidelines in global health.
| S-EPMC11353496 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFace-lifting surgeries were once common among individuals over 60 years old due to skin laxity, but recent trends favor thread lifting in this age group. Understanding dynamic changes in facial anatomy during postural shifts is essential.MethodFresh cadaver studies have demonstrated the passage of threads through the superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) layer, confirming the efficacy of the technique. Proper insertion depth targeting SMAS repositioning, rather than superficial skin layers, is crucial.ResultThe natural movement of tissues secured by thread (N-Cog and N-Fix, N-Finders Inc., Korea) insertion results in lifting effects. However, complications may arise if threads affect deeper facial muscles, leading to discomfort. Fibrous septa play a significant role in guiding thread placement, with different densities influencing thread maneuverability and tissue response during lifting.ConclusionProcedures targeting SMAS repositioning using threads aim to maintain the new position of relocated tissues. Understanding structural variations in facial regions informs thread selection and placement. Aligning threads with tissue movement and the intended SMAS layer positioning is vital to prevent complications. Balancing thread insertion depth and tissue traction is critical for successful outcomes. Modern thread lifting techniques prioritize SMAS repositioning, enhancing lifting effects while ensuring procedure safety and efficacy.
| S-EPMC10945592 | biostudies-literature