↓ Skip to main content

Operating list composition and surgical performance

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Surgery, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 3,403)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
150 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Operating list composition and surgical performance
Published in
British Journal of Surgery, March 2018
DOI 10.1002/bjs.10804
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. W. Pike, F. Mushtaq, R. P. Mann, P. Chambers, G. Hall, J. E. Tomlinson, R. Mir, R. M. Wilkie, M. Mon-Williams, J. P. A. Lodge

Abstract

Recent reviews suggest that the way in which surgeons prepare for a procedure (warm up) can affect performance. Operating lists present a natural experiment to explore this phenomenon. The aim was to use a routinely collected large data set on surgical procedures to understand the relationship between case list order and operative performance. Theatre lists involving the 35 procedures performed most frequently by senior surgeons across 38 private hospitals in the UK over 26 months were examined. A linear mixed-effects model and matched analysis were used to estimate the impact of list order and the cost of switching between procedures on a list while controlling for key prognosticators. The influence of procedure method (open versus minimally invasive) and complexity was also explored. The linear mixed-effects model included 255 757 procedures, and the matched analysis 48 632 pairs of procedures. Repeating the same procedure in a list resulted in an overall time saving of 0·98 per cent for each increase in list position. Switching between procedures increased the duration by an average of 6·48 per cent. The overall reduction in operating time from completing the second procedure straight after the first was 6·18 per cent. This pattern of results was consistent across procedure method and complexity. There is a robust relationship between operating list composition and surgical performance (indexed by duration of operation). An evidence-based approach to structuring a theatre list could reduce the total operating time.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 150 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 42%
Researcher 3 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 26%
Unspecified 3 16%
Mathematics 1 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 5%
Other 3 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 127. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2018.
All research outputs
#117,860
of 13,518,738 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Surgery
#38
of 3,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,647
of 272,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Surgery
#1
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,518,738 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,403 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 272,254 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.