Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32291540›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

Workplace absenteeism amongst patients undergoing open vs. robotic radical prostatectomy, hysterectomy, and partial colectomy.

Daniel Pucheril, Sean A Fletcher, Xi Chen, David F Friedlander, Alexander P Cole, Marieke J Krimphove, Adam C Fields, Nelya Melnitchouk, Adam S Kibel, Prokar Dasgupta and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Daniel PucherilDivision of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Sean A FletcherDivision of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Xi ChenDivision of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
David F FriedlanderDivision of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Alexander P ColeDivision of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Marieke J KrimphoveDivision of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Adam C FieldsDivision of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Nelya MelnitchoukCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Adam S KibelDivision of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Prokar Dasgupta *MRC Centre for Transplantation, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, King's College, London, UK.
Quoc-Dien Trinh *Division of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. qtrinh@bwh.harvard.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3857-9276

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is controversy regarding the widespread uptake of robotic surgery across several surgical disciplines. While it has been shown to confer clinical benefits such as decreased blood loss and shorter hospital stays, some argue that the benefits of this technology do not outweigh its high cost. We performed a retrospective insurance-based analysis to investigate how undergoing robotic surgery, compared to open surgery, may impact the time in which an employed individual returns to work after undergoing major surgery.

methodsWe identified a cohort of US adults with employer-sponsored insurance using claims data from the MarketScan database who underwent either open or robotic radical prostatectomy, hysterectomy/myomectomy, and partial colectomy from 2012 to 2016. We performed multiple regression models incorporating propensity scores to assess the effect of robotic vs. open surgery on the number of absent days from work, adjusting for demographic characteristics and baseline absenteeism.

resultsIn a cohort of 1157 individuals with employer-sponsored insurance, those undergoing open surgery, compared to robotic surgery, had 9.9 more absent workdays for radical prostatectomy (95%CI 5.0 to 14.7, p < 0.001), 25.3 for hysterectomy/myomectomy (95%CI 11.0-39.6, p < 0.001), and 29.8 for partial colectomy (95%CI 14.8-44.8, p < 0.001)

conclusionFor the three major procedures studied, robotic surgery was associated with fewer missed days from work compared to open surgery. This information helps payers, patients, and providers better understand some of the indirect benefits of robotic surgery relative to its cost.

Indexed as

AbsenteeismAdolescentAdultColectomyFemaleHumansHysterectomyMaleMiddle AgedProstatectomyRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresWorkplaceYoung AdultHealth services researchOncologyRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID32291540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.