ArticleInternational orthopaedics2015
Inpatient mortality after orthopaedic surgery.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The ability of comorbidity indices to predict mortality in an orthopedic setting: a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Mortality in orthopedic patients: a retrospective review of 333 medical records.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Considerations for selecting and implementing comorbidity indices when using secondary data sources: a guide for health researchers.International journal of population data science · 2025Review
- Associations of preoperative anemia and postoperative hemoglobin values with hospital costs in total knee arthroplasty (TKA).Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Preoperative patients' health decrease moderately, while hospital costs increase for hip and knee replacement due to the first COVID-19 lockdown in Germany.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Article
- Diabetes Is Predictive of Postoperative Outcomes and Readmission Following Posterior Lumbar Fusion.Global spine journal · 2022Article
- Article
- Comorbidity does not predict long-term mortality after total hip arthroplasty.Acta orthopaedica · 2017Article
- CT of Patients With Hip Fracture: Muscle Size and Attenuation Help Predict Mortality.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAdequate comorbidity risk adjustment is central for reliable outcome prediction and provider performance evaluation. The two most commonly employed risk-adjustment methods in orthopaedic surgery were not originally validated in this patient population. We sought (1) to develop a single numeric comorbidity score for predicting inpatient mortality in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery by combining and reweighting the conditions included in the Charlson and Elixhauser measures, and to compare its predictive performance to each of the separate component scores. We also (2) evaluated the new score separately for spine surgery, adult reconstruction, hip fracture, and musculoskeletal oncology admissions.
methodsData from the National Hospital Discharge Survey for the years 1990 through 2007 were obtained. A comorbidity score for predicting inpatient mortality was developed by combining conditions from the Charlson and Elixhauser measures. Weights were derived from a random sample of 80% of the cohort (n = 26,454,972), and the predictive ability of the new score was internally validated on the remaining 20% (n = 6,739,169). Performance of scores was assessed and compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) derived from multivariable logistic regression models.
resultsThe new combined comorbidity score (AUC = 0.858, 95% CI 0.856-0.859) performed 58% better than the Charlson score (AUC = 0.794, 95% CI 0.792-0.796) and 12% better than the Elixhauser score (AUC = 0.845, 95% CI 0.844-0.847). Of the seven conditions that received the highest weights in the new combined score, only three of them were included in both the Charlson and the Elixhauser indices. The new combined score achieved higher discriminatory power for all orthopaedic admission subgroups.
conclusionA single numeric comorbidity score combining conditions from the Charlson and Elixhauser models provided better discrimination of inpatient mortality than either of its constituent scores. Future research should test this score in other populations and data settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25711395What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.