| Nurse‐led versus doctor‐led POA for elective surgical patients? |
|
Patient or population: elective surgical patients requiring regional or general anaesthesia
Settings:
Intervention: nurse‐led versus doctor‐led POA |
| Outcomes |
Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) |
Relative effect
(95% CI) |
No of participants
(studies) |
Quality of the evidence
(GRADE) |
Comments |
| Assumed risk |
Corresponding risk |
|
Control |
Nurse‐led versus doctor‐led POA |
| Cancellation for clinical reasons |
See comment |
See comment |
Not estimable |
0
(0) |
See comment |
No data available from eligible studies |
| Cancellation by patient |
See comment |
See comment |
Not estimable |
0
(0) |
See comment |
No data available from eligible studies |
| Patient satisfaction with POA |
See comment |
See comment |
Not estimable |
42
(1) |
See comment |
One study presented qualitative data only from 42 participants and a focus group |
| Gain in patient information or knowledge |
See comment |
See comment |
Not estimable |
0
(0) |
See comment |
No data available from eligible studies |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval. |
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence.
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. |
