MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221065746 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/irac012.215

587 Ambient temperatures in the burn operating room: A QI initiative

2022· article· en· W4221065746 on OpenAlexaff
Alan D. Rogers, Robert Cartotto, David K. Wallace, Syena Moltaji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypothermiaPerioperativeBurn centerAnesthesiaSurgeryTotal body surface areaCore temperatureEmergency medicinePoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Patients with burn injuries are particularly susceptible to perioperative hypothermia, which is associated with a range of complications, including infection, bleeding and delayed wound healing. Raising the operating room (OR) ambient temperature is an important strategy to prevent hypothermia, but we were uncertain about how strictly we do this. The purpose of this study was to determine the ambient OR temperatures during acute burn surgery as the first step of a quality improvement initiative to ensure we are maintaining a warm OR environment. Methods Between 1/3/2020 and 28/2/2021, ambient temperatures during surgery in the burn OR of an ABA-verified burn center were recorded every 15 minutes. Temperatures were measured using a wall-mounted smart sensor, transmitted to a mobile smartphone application via Bluetooth. All patients undergoing acute burn excision and closure procedures lasting > 2 hours were included in the study. Hypothermia was defined as a core temperature < 36°C. Results Of the 119 patients, the majority were male (n=86; 72.3%), the mean age was 49.8 years (range 18-89) and the mean total body surface area (TBSA) was 15.8% (range 1-62%). They underwent 261 operations (mean 2.2 cases per patient; range 1-15) with a mean duration of 211.1 minutes (range 120-468 minutes). Sixty-two patients underwent 1 surgery, and 31 had 2 surgeries. Eight patients (6.7%) died. Thirty-three patients (27.7%) were hypothermic at the end of 43 cases (16.5%). The mean ambient temperature was 24.8oC (range 18.7oC to 29.6oC). Hypothermic patients (n= 33 patients, 43 cases), did not differ significantly in age or operative duration from non- hypothermic patients (n= 86 patients, 218 cases) but did have significantly larger %TBSA burns [32.3 vs 24.8 (p= 0.02)]. Hypothermic cases experienced significantly lower ambient temperatures at the start of surgery (p=0.007), and mean temperature during surgery (p=0.009), and tended to experience a lower ambient temperature at the end of surgery (24.5 C vs 25.1 °C , p= 0.06). [Table] Conclusions We have identified that the ambient temperature in our burn OR is lower than desirable and that this is directly related to development of hypothermia. These results now indicate that a QI intervention (stricter attention and manoeuvers to ensuring a warm operating room at the start and during surgery) is required.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207