Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23621593›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurosurgery2013

Are readmission rates on a neurosurgical service indicators of quality of care?

Manish N Shah, Ivan T Stoev, Dominic E Sanford, Feng Gao, Paul Santiago, David P Jaques, Ralph G Dacey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurosurgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Manish N ShahDepartment of Neurosurgery.
Ivan T Stoev
Dominic E Sanford
Feng Gao
Paul Santiago
David P Jaques
Ralph G Dacey

Funding

Washington University Center for Cellular ImagingP30CA091842 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TIMOTHY J. EBERLEIN · 2001 to 2026
$128.0M
SURGICAL ONCOLOGY TRAINING GRANTT32CA009621 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TIMOTHY J. EBERLEIN, William E. Gillanders · 1988 to 2026
$12.9M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA091842NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009621PHS HHS NST32007205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectThe goal of this study was to examine the reasons for early readmissions within 30 days of discharge to a major academic neurosurgical service.

methodsA database of readmissions within 30 days of discharge between April 2009 and September 2010 was retrospectively reviewed. Clinical and administrative variables associated with readmission were examined, including age, sex, race, days between discharge and readmission, and insurance type. The readmissions were then assigned independently by 2 neurosurgeons into 1 of 3 categories: scheduled, adverse event, and unrelated. The adverse event readmissions were further subcategorized into patients readmitted although best practices were followed, those readmitted due to progression of their underlying disease, and those readmitted for preventable causes. These variables were compared descriptively.

resultsA total of 348 patients with 407 readmissions were identified, comprising 11.5% of the total 3552 admissions. The median age of readmitted patients was 55 years (range 16-96 years) and patients older than 65 years totaled 31%. There were 216 readmissions (53% of 407) for management of an adverse event that was classified as either preventable (149 patients; 37%) or unpreventable (67 patients; 16%). There were 113 patients (28%) who met readmission criteria but who were having an electively scheduled neurosurgical procedure. Progression of disease (48 patients; 12%) and treatment unrelated to primary admission (30 patients; 7%) were additional causes for readmission. There was no significant difference in the proportion of early readmissions by payer status when comparing privately insured patients and those with public or no insurance (p = 0.09).

conclusionsThe majority of early readmissions within 30 days of discharge to the neurosurgical service were not preventable. Many of these readmissions were for adverse events that occurred even though best practices were followed, or for progression of the natural history of the neurosurgical disease requiring expected but unpredictably timed subsequent treatment. Judicious care often requires readmission to prevent further morbidity or death in neurosurgical patients, and penalties for readmission will not change these patient care obligations.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedNeurosurgeryNeurosurgical ProceduresPatient ReadmissionQuality of Health CareTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID23621593
PMCPMC3925683

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.