Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19685033›Full record

ArticleDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2009

[Visceral and thoracic surgical interventions in patients over 80 years old. Evaluation of cost coverage].

F Löhe, H M Hornung, K-W Jauch, M K Angele

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 76% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

F LöheChirurgische Klinik und Poliklinik der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Campus Grosshadern, München. Florian.Loehe@klinikum-landshut.de
H M Hornung
K-W Jauch
M K Angele
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to the higher incidence of malignant tumours with increasing age, cancer is the second most common cause of death among those aged over 65 years old. Consequently, demographic changes in Germany have resulted in a rising demand for oncological operations in elderly patients which is more cost-intensive. Objective of the present study in the setting of a university surgical department is whether oncological operations on patients over 80 years old is cost-effective in the era of diagnosis-related groups. The revenue and expenditure of 116 cases of patients over 80 years old documented for the years 2005-2007 were collated and evaluated. The calculated average proceeds were compared with cases of patients under 80 years old.The average return was -1493.50 EUR/case for over 80-year olds and was not cost-effective. The presence or absence of complications had a significant impact on proceeds, because the mean return/case without complications was profitable (1297.30 EUR). Medical care of patients over 80 years old was on average cost-effective and generated a profit. Oncological operations in patients under 80 years old were not sufficiently remunerated by the current DRG system. Therefore, there is an economical risk associated with oncological operations in elderly patients.

Indexed as

Abdominal NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overComorbidityCost-Benefit AnalysisCosts and Cost AnalysisDiagnosis-Related GroupsGermanyHospital CostsHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayNational Health ProgramsPostoperative ComplicationsReimbursement Mechanisms

Identifiers

PMID19685033
OpenAlexW2290900154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.