ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
Examining emergency department utilization in the post-foregut surgery patient.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to examine emergency department (ED) utilization following minimally invasive foregut surgery and determine its impact on costs. Furthermore, we sought to determine their relationship to the index procedure, whether they are preventable, and describe strategies for decreasing unnecessary ED visits.
methodsA retrospective review was conducted for all patients undergoing foregut procedures from January 2018 through June 2019. ED utilization was examined from 0 to 90 days. The proportion of visits related to surgery, preventable visits, and median ED costs were compared between visits occurring 0-30 days (early) versus 31-90 days (delayed) postoperatively as well as occurring from 8 am to 5 pm versus 5 pm to 8 am.
resultsOf 458 patients who underwent foregut surgery, 72.5% were female and the mean age was 60 years old. 92 patients (20%) presented to the ED within 90 days. Of these, 59 patients (64.1%) presented to the ED early versus 33 patients (35.9%) delayed. 56.5% of ED visits occurred during clinic hours. 56 (60.9%) ED visits were related to the procedure and 20 (35.7%) were preventable. The median ED return cost was $970. Early ED visits were significantly more likely to be related to surgery (72.9% vs 39.4%, p = 0.0016). There was no significant difference in the proportion of visits that were preventable (32.6% vs 46.2%, p = 0.3755) and ED return cost did not vary significantly ($995 vs $965, p = 0.43) between early and delayed visits.
conclusionsED visits are common after foregut surgery and represent a financial burden on healthcare. Most visits occur early and are more likely to be related to surgery. Importantly, more than one-third of ED visits related to surgery were preventable and most occurred during clinic hours on weekdays. Providers should consider implementation of strategies to improve outpatient utilization and decrease unnecessary ED visits.
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.