ArticleHip & pelvis2025
A Comparative Study between Hip Arthroscopy Procedures Performed in Hospitals and Ambulatory Surgical Centers.
Article in Hip & pelvis, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Hip arthroscopy is commonly performed on an outpatient basis; however, many are still performed in hospital operating rooms (HOR) over ambulatory surgery centers (ASC). Therefore, this study aimed to compare patient demographics and complications between hip arthroscopies performed in HOR and ASC. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study (level III evidence) of 832 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between 2014-2022 at a multi-hospital academic health system. Nine hundred four hip arthroscopies were performed, 72 of which were staged bilateral. Demographics, procedure details, and complications were recorded from the electronic medical record. Clinical environments were compared by using chi-squared tests with adjusted residuals (ARs), Welch's Results: Eight hundred eighty-one cases were performed in HOR while 23 cases were conducted at ASC. Patients with at least one medical comorbidity (91.4% vs. 65.2%, AR=4.3) or who required 3 or more suture anchors (31.7% vs. 4.3%, AR=2.8) were more likely to undergo surgery in HOR. Femoroplasty (87.0% vs. 57.8%, AR=-2.8) and capsular repair (69.6% vs. 47.6%, AR=-2.1) had increased likelihood of being performed at ASC. There were no differences found in returns to the operating room or readmissions. Postoperative emergency department (ED) visits were more common in patients treated at HORs (3.0% vs. 0.0%, AR=-2.7). Conclusion: ASCs and HORs both provided safe operating environments. ED visits were higher in patients treated at HORs during the 90-day postoperative period, often due to their comorbidities rather than as a direct sequela from surgery.
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.