ArticleSurgery in practice and science2023
The association of closed-collaborative SICU modeling on emergency general surgery patient outcomes.
Article in Surgery in practice and science, 2023. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Surgical intensive care unit (SICU) optimization is a critical factor impacting patient outcomes and resource utilization. SICUs operate using an open or closed model, where the surgeon or intensivist, respectively, manages critically-ill patients. In 2017, we adopted a closed-collaborative model. This study aimed to compare patient outcomes in the closed-collaborative model vs. the previous open model in a cohort of emergency general surgery (EGS) patients. Methods: A retrospective review of EGS SICU patients from August 2015 to July 2019 was performed. Patients were divided into "Open" and "Closed" cohorts before or after closed-collaborative model implementation on August 1, 2017. Demographic variables and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results: We identified 434 patients (O:191; C:243). While no significant demographic differences were observed, there was a higher proportion of patients with qSOFA scores greater than 2 in the closed cohort. There were no differences regarding sepsis, cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism, anemia, SICU length of stay (LOS), SICU costs, ventilation requirements, or ventilator duration; mortality rate was higher, but hospital LOS was shorter in the closed cohort. Conclusion: Overall, outcomes were not statistically different between the two models, despite sicker patients in the closed group, which we suspect accounts for the higher mortality in this group. We expect the decreased hospital LOS observed in the closed cohort improved bed management, patient flow, and ultimately led to institutional cost savings. Further investigation is warranted to examine SICU modeling effects in other surgical specialties and to evaluate potential hospital-level administrative benefits.
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.