Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40126142›Full record

ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2025

Characteristics and outcomes of older patients undergoing out- versus inpatient surgery in Europe. A secondary analysis of the Peri-interventional Outcome Study in the Elderly (POSE).

Linda Grüßer, Mark Coburn, Matthias Schmid, Rolf Rossaint, Sebastian Ziemann, Ana Kowark, POSE Study group

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Linda GrüßerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1274-5611
Mark CoburnDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7930-0270
Matthias SchmidDepartment of Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0788-0317
Rolf RossaintDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7587-1693
Sebastian ZiemannDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4485-6030
Ana KowarkDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7433-8675
POSE Study group

Funding

The main study was supported by the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) as an ESAIC Research Group. MS received funding from the ESAIC POSE Research Group for this secondary analysis. The remaining authors report no funding for this secondary analysis.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of older patients undergoing surgical procedures with anaesthesia care is projected to rise. In order to cope with the increased demand, the expansion of outpatient surgery may play a decisive role. We aim to investigate the characteristics and outcomes of the older outpatient population. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe Peri-interventional Outcome Study in the Elderly in Europe (POSE) was a prospective multicenter study investigating characteristics and outcomes in 9497 patients aged 80 years and older undergoing a procedure with anaesthesia care. This secondary analysis of the POSE data investigated characteristics, functional and cognitive outcomes, and mortality in the outpatient in comparison to the inpatient population. Functional status was assessed as independent, partially dependent, and totally dependent at baseline and 30 days postinterventional. Cognitive status was defined by the number of recalled words (0-3) in the Mini-Cog test and brief cognitive screening at baseline and follow-up.

resultsOut of the 9497 older patients, 7562 were planned inpatients and 1935 planned outpatients. Older outpatients presented with fewer comorbidities and fewer medications than older inpatients and underwent minor procedures more often Their baseline functional status was more often independent, and they had a higher estimated probability of staying independent. Outpatients recalled three words at baseline and follow-up more often than inpatients. The estimated 30-day survival probabilities with 95% confidence intervals were 0.997 [0.994; 0.999] in the group with planned outpatient surgery and 0.948 [0.942; 0.953] with planned inpatient surgery.

conclusionOur results indicate that functional and cognitive status at baseline and follow-up were higher in planned outpatients than in planned inpatients. However, only short screening tools for the assessment of functional and cognitive status were used. Overall, outpatient interventions were associated with low mortality. Further research is recommended to develop scores that facilitate the identification of patients suitable for outpatient surgery. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This secondary analysis of a prospectively collected cohort of elderly surgical cases in Europe describes case factors related to inpatient compared to outpatient surgical interventions. The findings show that inpatient or outpatient surgery selection is associated with different degrees of risk for important perioperative outcomes in this cohort.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Surgical ProceduresAgedAged, 80 and overCognitionEuropeFemaleHumansInpatientsMaleProspective StudiesTreatment Outcomeambulatory surgerycognitive and functional outcomesolder patientspostoperative mortality

Identifiers

PMID40126142
PMCPMC11932067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.