Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34026101›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2021

Patient reported outcomes in an elder-friendly surgical environment: Prospective, controlled before-after study.

Bianka Saravana-Bawan, Lindsey M Warkentin, Arto Ohinmaa, Adrian S Wagg, Jayna Holroyd-Leduc, Raj S Padwal, Fiona Clement, Rachel G Khadaroo

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
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

8 authors.

Bianka Saravana-BawanDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Lindsey M WarkentinDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Arto OhinmaaSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405 87 Ave, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Adrian S WaggDepartment of Medicine, University of Alberta, Clinical Sciences Building, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Jayna Holroyd-LeducDepartments of Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Teaching Research and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada.
Raj S PadwalDepartment of Medicine, University of Alberta, Clinical Sciences Building, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Fiona ClementDepartments of Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Teaching Research and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada.
Rachel G KhadarooDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Acute Care for the Elderly (ACE) model has demonstrated clinical benefit, but there is little evidence regarding quality of life after discharge. The Elder-friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) study was conducted to assess implementation of an ACE unit on an acute surgical service. Improved clinical and economic outcomes have been demonstrated, but post-discharge patient reported outcomes have not yet been reported.

methodsProspective, concurrently controlled, before-after study at two tertiary care hospitals in Alberta, Canada. The SF-12, EQ-5D, Canadian Malnutrition Screening Tool (CMST) and patient satisfaction were collected from elderly (≥ 65 years old) patients, 6 weeks and 6 months after discharge from an acute care surgical service. A difference-in-difference (DID) method was used to analyze between-site effects.

resultsAt six weeks, patient satisfaction was high at 68%-86%, with significant improvement Pre-to Post-EASE at the control site (p < 0.001), but not the intervention site (p = 0.06). For the intervention site, within-site adjusted pre-post effects were nonsignificant for all patient reported outcomes [EQ-Index Score β coefficient (SE): 0.042 (0.022); EQ-Visual Analog Scale: 0.10 (2.14); SF-12 Physical Component Score: -0.57 (0.84); SF-12 Mental Component Score: 1.17 (0.84); CMST Score: -0.39 (0.34)]. DID analyses were also non significant for all outcomes except for SF-12 Mental Component Score (p < 0.001).

conclusionThe clinically and economically beneficial EASE interventions do not appear to compromise quality of life, risk for malnutrition, or patient satisfaction in the post-discharge period. Further research with larger sample size is needed with comparisons to pre-intervention and the early post-discharge period.

Indexed as

ACE modelElderlyEmergency surgeryNutritionPatient reported outcomesQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID34026101
PMCPMC8120860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.