ArticleWorld journal of surgery2017
A Population-Based Cohort Study of Emergency Appendectomy Performed in England and New York State.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality Outcomes in Appendicitis Care: Identifying Opportunities to Improve Care.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Managing appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic-What do we need to know from the evidence?International journal of clinical practice · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare selected outcomes (30-day reoperation and total length of hospital stay) following emergency appendectomy between populations from New York State and England.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study used demographic and in-hospital outcome data from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative databases for all patients aged 18+ years undergoing appendectomy between April 2009 and March 2014. Univariate and adjusted multivariable logistic regression were used to test significant factors. A one-to-one propensity score matched dataset was created to compare odd ratios (OR) of reoperations between the two populations.
resultsA total of 188,418 patient records, 121,428 (64.4%) from England and 66,990 (35.6%) from NYS, were extracted. Appendectomy was completed laparoscopically in 77.7% of patients in New York State compared to 53.6% in England (P < 0.001). The median lengths of hospital stay for patients undergoing appendectomy were 3 (interquartile range, IQR 2-4) days versus 2 (IQR 1-3) days (P < 0.001) in England and New York State, respectively. All 30-day reoperation rates were higher in England compared to New York State (1.2 vs. 0.6%, P < 0.001), representing nearly a twofold higher risk of 30-day reoperation (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.64-2.14, P < 0.001). As the proportion of appendectomy completed laparoscopically increased, there was a reduction in the reoperation rate in England (correlation coefficient -0.170, P = 0.036).
conclusionsReoperations and total length of hospital stay is significantly higher following appendectomy in England compared to New York State. Increasing the numbers of appendectomy completed laparoscopically may decrease length of stay and reoperations.
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.