ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
An evaluation of bariatric surgery in all military treatment facilities.
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.
- Impact of beneficiary status on bariatric surgery outcomes in a military treatment facility.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple bariatric databases have been formed, but there have been no comprehensive assessments of military treatment facilities (MTFs). MTFs have unique patients and coverage policies by Tricare insurance.
methodsMHS Mart (M2) was used to review the outpatient medical record, AHLTA, from October 2013 to December 2018 for type of bariatric procedure, demographics, military-specific data, comorbidities, and complications, which were identified by ICD code and CPT code, including a robotic modifier. MTFs were classified by volume as high (HV) with > 50 cases annually, moderate (MV) with 25 to 50 cases, and low (LV) with < 25 cases, as well as by the presence of surgical residencies.
resultsPatients at MTFs were slightly younger and more female than by other database studies. The Army was the most common branch of service, and dependents of retirees were the most common beneficiary population. MTFs with residencies had slightly older patients and fewer Army patients. HV, MV, and LV MTFs had similar patients except for branch of service. Over time, the proportion of open gastric bypasses increased, biliopancreatic diversions with duodenal switches decreased, and robotic assistance increased 744%. MTFs with residencies performed more procedures than those without residencies, and with the exception of procedures utilizing robotic assistance, procedures were overall similar to those without residencies. HV MTFs performed most of the procedures annually, and their procedures were proportionately similar to MV and LV MTFs, with the exception of HV MTFs having a higher proportion of laparoscopic bypasses and robotic assistance.
conclusionMTFs largely perform similar procedures on similar patients relative to MBSAQIP and NSQIP studies. Robotic assistance increased significantly over time. Except for laparoscopic bypasses and procedures with robotic assistance, HV MTFs performed similar proportions of procedures to MV and LV MTFs. MTFs with residencies performed similar procedures to those without residencies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33051766What 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.