The access and invasiveness-based classification of medical procedures to clarify non-invasive from different forms of minimally invasive and open surgery.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-24 DOI:10.4103/jmas.jmas_240_23
Mark Steven Whiteley, Sienna Esme Davey, Gabriel Mark Placzek
{"title":"The access and invasiveness-based classification of medical procedures to clarify non-invasive from different forms of minimally invasive and open surgery.","authors":"Mark Steven Whiteley, Sienna Esme Davey, Gabriel Mark Placzek","doi":"10.4103/jmas.jmas_240_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The rapid development of less invasive and traumatic medical procedures has resulted in a mixture of terms used to describe them, without any agreed definition for each. This is confusing to both medical professionals and patients and can lead to unrealistic patient expectations. The aim of this article is to show the current confused nomenclature and to suggest a new, simple classification based on access and invasiveness (AI) that can be applied to any medical procedure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed an online search for definitions for 'non-invasive', 'non-surgical', 'minimally invasive', 'minimal access', 'pinhole' and 'keyhole'. We then searched peer-reviewed medical papers (PRMPs) and patient facing websites (PFWs) for the following index procedures, to see which of the original 6 terms were used to describe them: transvaginal ultrasound, sclerotherapy for leg veins, botulinum toxin injections, dermal fillers, endovenous thermal ablation and laparoscopic gall bladder removal.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found a wide variety of definitions for each of the initial terms. In both PRMPs and PFWs, there were a variety of terms used for each index procedure (i.e.: transvaginal ultrasound, injections of sclerotherapy, botulinum toxin or dermal fillers being both 'non-invasive' and 'minimally invasive') showing confusion in the classification of procedures. We suggested the 'AI classification' based on access (A - none, B - natural orifice or C - penetrating an epithelial surface) and invasiveness (1 - none, 2 - surface damage, 3 - needle = <21G, 4 - cannula >21G but not a surgical trocar, 5 - surgical trocars or small incisions and 6 - incisions).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current confusion of terms used for procedures that are less invasive than the open surgical alternatives leads to confusion and possible false patient expectations. We have proposed an AI classification that can be applied easily to any procedure, giving a uniform classification for medical professionals and patients to understand.</p>","PeriodicalId":48905,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11354956/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.jmas_240_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The rapid development of less invasive and traumatic medical procedures has resulted in a mixture of terms used to describe them, without any agreed definition for each. This is confusing to both medical professionals and patients and can lead to unrealistic patient expectations. The aim of this article is to show the current confused nomenclature and to suggest a new, simple classification based on access and invasiveness (AI) that can be applied to any medical procedure.

Methods: We performed an online search for definitions for 'non-invasive', 'non-surgical', 'minimally invasive', 'minimal access', 'pinhole' and 'keyhole'. We then searched peer-reviewed medical papers (PRMPs) and patient facing websites (PFWs) for the following index procedures, to see which of the original 6 terms were used to describe them: transvaginal ultrasound, sclerotherapy for leg veins, botulinum toxin injections, dermal fillers, endovenous thermal ablation and laparoscopic gall bladder removal.

Results: We found a wide variety of definitions for each of the initial terms. In both PRMPs and PFWs, there were a variety of terms used for each index procedure (i.e.: transvaginal ultrasound, injections of sclerotherapy, botulinum toxin or dermal fillers being both 'non-invasive' and 'minimally invasive') showing confusion in the classification of procedures. We suggested the 'AI classification' based on access (A - none, B - natural orifice or C - penetrating an epithelial surface) and invasiveness (1 - none, 2 - surface damage, 3 - needle = <21G, 4 - cannula >21G but not a surgical trocar, 5 - surgical trocars or small incisions and 6 - incisions).

Conclusion: The current confusion of terms used for procedures that are less invasive than the open surgical alternatives leads to confusion and possible false patient expectations. We have proposed an AI classification that can be applied easily to any procedure, giving a uniform classification for medical professionals and patients to understand.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对医疗程序进行基于入路和创面的分类,以明确无创手术与不同形式的微创手术和开放手术。
背景:微创和创伤性医疗程序的快速发展,导致用于描述这些程序的术语五花八门,而且每种术语都没有公认的定义。这让医疗专业人员和患者都感到困惑,并可能导致患者产生不切实际的期望。本文旨在说明目前混乱的术语,并提出一种基于可及性和侵入性(AI)的新的简单分类方法,该方法可适用于任何医疗程序:我们在网上搜索了 "无创"、"非手术"、"微创"、"微创"、"针孔 "和 "锁孔 "的定义。然后,我们搜索了同行评议医学论文(PRMPs)和面向患者的网站(PFWs)中的下列索引程序,以了解最初的 6 个术语中哪些术语被用于描述这些程序:经阴道超声波、腿部静脉硬化剂注射、肉毒毒素注射、皮肤填充剂、静脉腔内热消融和腹腔镜胆囊切除术:我们发现每个初始术语都有多种定义。在 PRMPs 和 PFWs 中,每个索引程序都使用了不同的术语(例如:经阴道超声波、注射硬化剂、肉毒毒素或皮肤填充剂,既有 "非侵入性",也有 "微创性"),显示了程序分类的混乱。我们建议采用 "AI 分类法",该分类法基于通路(A - 无,B - 自然孔或 C - 穿透上皮表面)和侵入性(1 - 无,2 - 表面损伤,3 - 针 = 21G 但非手术套管,5 - 手术套管或小切口,6 - 切口):结论:与开腹手术相比,创伤较小的手术目前使用的术语比较混乱,这导致了混淆,并可能使患者产生错误的期望。我们提出了一种人工智能分类方法,可轻松应用于任何手术,为医疗专业人员和患者提供统一的分类方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Minimal Access Surgery (JMAS), the official publication of Indian Association of Gastrointestinal Endo Surgeons, launched in early 2005. The JMAS, a quarterly publication, is the first English-language journal from India, as also from this part of the world, dedicated to Minimal Access Surgery. The JMAS boasts an outstanding editorial board comprising of Indian and international experts in the field.
期刊最新文献
A case series analysis of spigelian hernia: A diagnostic dilemma and its successful laparoscopic repair. Giant left spontaneous diaphragmatic hernia repair via combined laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approaches. Glanzmann's thrombasthenia: A nightmare for hernia surgeons. Impact of uterine weight on surgical outcomes in robotic hysterectomy: An ambispective analysis. Initial experience of SSI Mantra robot-assisted Transabdominal pre-peritoneal repair of primary ventral hernias.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1