ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Comparison of Externally Transferred and Self-Recruited Patients with Hip and Knee Revision Arthroplasty at a Certified Maximum-Care Arthroplasty Center (ACmax).
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAccording to the guidelines of the EndoCert initiative, certified maximum-care arthroplasty centers (ACmax) are obliged to admit patients from certified arthroplasty centers (AC) if these patients need to be transferred to the more specialized ACmax due to difficult replacement and revision procedures as well as after complications in primary care that are beyond the expertise of the smaller centers. This study investigated whether the cohort of transferred patients differed from the patients directly recruited at the ACmax for factors such as severity of diagnosis, comorbidities or outcome. The aim was to determine whether transferred patients increased the resource requirements for the ACmax.
methodsA total of 136 patients were included in the retrospective study and analyzed in terms of case severity, length of hospital stays (LOS), Diagnosis-Related Group charges, readmission rate and concomitant diseases. All patients were followed for up to 12 months after the initial hospital stay.
resultsThere were significant differences between the groups of transferred and self-recruited patients. For example, transferred patients had a higher Patient Clinical Complexity Level (PCCL). Similarly, the increased Case Mix Index (CMI) of transferred patients indicated more intensive care during the inpatient stay. The higher values for the comorbidity indices also supported these results. This had an impact on the LOS and overall costs, too. The differences between the groups were also reflected by adverse events during the one-year follow-up. The higher percentage of patients with septic revisions, whose treatment is especially demanding, among transferred patients aggravated the differences even further. Thus, transferred patients were associated with increased resource requirements for the ACmax.
conclusionsWhile it serves patients' safety to transfer them to an ACmax with specialized expertise and greater structural quality, the care of transferred patients ties up considerable resources at the ACmax that might only be insufficiently reimbursed by the generalized tariffs.
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.