ArticleJAMA surgery2017
Outcomes and Costs of Managing Appendicitis at Safety-Net Hospitals.
Article in JAMA surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data resources for evaluating the economic and financial consequences of surgical care in the United States.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2022Review
- Deciphering the inflection points to achieve proficiency for each procedure step during training in laparoscopic appendicectomy.BJS open · 2021Observational
- Social determinants of health and outcomes of ventral hernia repair in a safety-net hospital setting.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2021Article
- A Nationwide Cohort Study of Outcome after Pediatric Appendicitis.European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie · 2021Observational
- How Safe Are Safety-Net Hospitals? Opportunities to Improve Outcomes for Vulnerable Patients Undergoing Hepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
- Bundled Payments for Appendectomy: a Model of Financial Implications to Institutions.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Review
- Data resource profile: State Inpatient Databases.International journal of epidemiology · 2019Article
- Quality of Care and Outcomes of Patients With Gynecologic Malignancies Treated at Safety-Net Hospitals.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2019Article
- GI Surgical Emergencies: Scope and Burden of Disease.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019Review
- The impact of hospital safety-net status on inpatient outcomes for brain tumor craniotomy: a 10-year nationwide analysis.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
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
importanceSafety-net hospitals serve vulnerable populations with limited resources. Although complex, elective operations performed at safety-net hospitals have been associated with inferior outcomes and higher costs, it is unclear whether a similar association has been seen with common emergency general surgery performed at safety-net hospitals.
objectiveTo evaluate the association of safety-net burden with the outcomes of appendectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsA retrospective review was conducted of all nonfederally funded hospitals in the California state inpatient database that performed appendectomies from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2011. A total of 349 hospitals performing 274 405 nonincidental appendectomies were stratified based on safety-net burden; low-burden hospitals had the lowest quartile of patients who either had Medicaid or were uninsured (0%-14%), medium-burden hospitals had the middle 2 quartiles (15%-41%), and high-burden hospitals had the highest quartile (>42%). Data analysis was performed from August 27 to September 8, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rates of laparoscopy, perforation, negative appendectomy, morbidity, length of stay, and cost.
resultsAmong the 349 hospitals in the study, high-burden hospitals treated a larger proportion of black patients than did medium- and low-burden hospitals (4.5% vs 2.4% vs 2.9%; P = .01), as well as Hispanic patients (64.8% vs 27.0% vs 22.0%; P < .001) and patients with perforated appendicitis (27.6% vs 23.6% vs 23.6%; P = .005). High-burden hospitals were less likely than medium- or low-burden hospitals to use laparoscopy (51.6% vs 60.7% vs 71.9%; P < .001). There were no differences in morbidity, length of stay, or cost. Multivariable regression analysis confirmed that high-burden hospitals were more likely than low-burden hospitals to treat perforated appendicitis (log %, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.03-0.12; P = .04) and less likely to use laparoscopy (-16.9% difference; 95% CI, -26.1% to -7.6%; P < .001), while achieving similar complication rates. Multivariable analysis also confirmed that high-burden hospitals have similar costs, despite being associated with longer length of stay (relative risk, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.09-1.26; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Safety-net hospitals treat a disproportionate number of patients with advanced appendicitis while falling behind in the use of laparoscopy. Nonetheless, safety-net hospitals treat this common surgical emergency with morbidity and cost similar to that seen at other hospitals. Additional research is needed to evaluate how these outcomes are achieved to improve all surgical outcomes at underresourced hospitals.
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.