Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: This study aims to reduce the waste generated from primary cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) repair.
Design: A retrospective chart review examined a single surgeon's experience with CL/P repair using standard draping technique and reduced draping technique. Fisher's exact tests were performed comparing complication rates between techniques.
Setting: All procedures were conducted at a single academic medical center under the care of a board-certified pediatric plastic surgeon and fellowship-trained pediatric anesthesiologists.
Patients: The study included all patients ≤ 24 months of age who underwent primary CL/P repair using a reduced draping technique at the senior author's institution. An equivalent number of patients who underwent CL/P repair by the senior author immediately prior to implementation of the reduced draping technique were included for comparison.
Intervention: Patients undergoing CL/P repair before the change in technique were draped using the standard CL/P draping. The senior author then switched to using a reduced draping on all CL/P repairs afterwards.
Main Outcome Measures: Weights and costs of both draping sets were obtained and differences calculated. A manual chart review was performed to assess rates of accidental intraoperative extubation, postoperative infection, fistula formation, and wound dehiscence.
Results: The implementation of a reduced draping technique resulted in a 530 gram weight savings and $7.49 cost savings per procedure. Fisher's exact tests revealed no statistically significant differences in complication rates except for oral mucosal dehiscence, which was lower in the reduced draping group.
Conclusions: Reduced draping in CL/P repairs significantly reduces operative waste without compromising surgical outcomes.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10556656241271706 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!