ArticleWorld journal of surgery2017
The Impact of Healthcare Privatization on Access to Surgical Care: Cholecystectomy as a Model.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social Representations of Healthcare Organisational Models and Professional Practice Among Public-Sector Physicians and Nurses in Portugal: A Prototypical Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic factors influence surgical wait times for non-emergent gynecologic surgical procedures: a retrospective analysis.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- The Impact of Healthcare Privatization on Access to Surgical Care: Cholecystectomy as a Model.World journal of surgery · 2017Article
- Variation in access to pediatric surgical care among coexisting public and private providers: inguinal hernia as a model.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
- Public-Private Partnership Policy in Primary Health Care: A Scoping Review.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
- Impact of Privatization on Healthcare System: A Systematic Review.Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrivatization is widely perceived as a tool to improve healthcare access; however, its impact on the access of surgical care has not been quantified. We used cholecystectomy as a model to assess the variation in access between coexisting public (PB) and private providers (PVs).
methodsWe performed cross-sectional analysis of patients who underwent cholecystectomy at two major PB and PV groups serving Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Representative sample sizes were estimated based on 95 % confidence level and ±5 confidence interval (CI). Exclusion criteria were major comorbidities, emergency cholecystectomies, age ≥60 and concurrent non-minor procedures. Data collected were patients' demographics, payer status, and durations of symptoms, diagnosis and hospitalization.
resultsBetween 2012 and 2104, samples of 330 and 297 were randomly selected from the total of 2164 and 1315 cases performed at PV and PB, respectively. Seventy-eight PV and 73 PB cases were excluded. The distribution of publically funded/insured/self-paid was (3/179/70 PV) and (209/0/4 PB), respectively. Median durations between symptoms and surgery for PV and PB cases were 90 and 365 days (P < 0.001), respectively, while the wait times after ultrasound-based diagnosis were 125 and 11 days (P < 0.001), respectively. Median hospitalization time was significantly shorter in PV compared to PB (1 vs. 2 days, P = 0.001), and same-day admissions were more frequent in PV 94 % than PB 41 % (RR 2.3, CI 1.9-2.7).
conclusionsWhen coexist in a competitive environment, PV offers a remarkably better access to cholecystectomies compared to PB. Facilitating access to PV can be an effective strategy to improve patient's access to surgical care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27734081What 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.