Observational studyMedicine2017
A comparison of the surgical mortality due to colorectal perforation at different hospitals with data from 10,090 cases in the Japanese National Clinical Database.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Preoperative Stoma Site Marking on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients with Colorectal Perforation: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study.World journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic Surgery for Acute Diffuse Peritonitis Due to Gastrointestinal Perforation: A Nationwide Epidemiologic Study Using the National Clinical Database.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Article
- Development of gastroenterological surgery over the last decade in Japan: analysis of the National Clinical Database.Surgery today · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal perforation has a high rate of mortality. We compared the incidence and fatality rates of colorectal perforation among different hospitals in Japan using data from the nationwide surgical database.Patients were registered in the National Clinical Database (NCD) between January 1st, 2011 and December 31st, 2013. Patients with colorectal perforation were identified from surgery records by examining if acute diffuse peritonitis (ADP) and diseases associated with a high probability of colorectal perforation were noted. The primary outcome measures included the 30-day postsurgery mortality and surgical mortality of colorectal perforation. We analyzed differences in the observed-to-expected mortality (O/E) ratio between the two groups of hospitals, that is, specialized and non-specialized, using the logistic regression analysis forward selection method.There were 10,090 cases of disease-induced colorectal perforation during the study period. The annual average postoperative fatality rate was 11.36%. There were 3884 patients in the specialized hospital group and 6206 in the non-specialized hospital group. The O/E ratio (0.9106) was significantly lower in the specialized hospital group than in the non-specialized hospital group (1.0704). The experience level of hospitals in treating cases of colorectal perforation negatively correlated with the O/E ratio.We conducted the first study investigating differences among hospitals with respect to their fatality rate of colorectal perforation on the basis of data from a nationwide database. Our data suggest that patients with colorectal perforation should choose to be treated at a specialized hospital or a hospital that treats five or more cases of colorectal perforation per year. The results of this study indicate that specialized hospitals may provide higher quality medical care, which in turn proves that government policy on healthcare is effective at improving the medical system in Japan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.