Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40496282›Full record

ArticlePublic health challenges2023

Prioritization of patients for surgery in Canada: The case of hip and knee replacement surgeries in Newfoundland.

Anh Thu Vo, Yanqing Yi, Maria Mathews, James Valcour, Michelle Alexander, Marcel Billard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health challenges, 2023. 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

6 authors.

Anh Thu VoFaculty of Medicine Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's Newfoundland Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3943-934X
Yanqing YiFaculty of Medicine Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's Newfoundland Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2515-0403
Maria MathewsSchulich School of Medicine & Dentistry Western University London Ontario Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5174-104X
James ValcourFaculty of Medicine Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's Newfoundland Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9775-4199
Michelle AlexanderClinical Efficiency Program Eastern Health, St. John's Newfoundland Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-3904-6163
Marcel BillardCentral Intake Division Clinical Efficiency Program Eastern Health, St. John's Newfoundland Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6477-2735

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Single-entry models (SEM) improve wait times for hip and knee replacement, but little is known whether prioritization implemented in SEM can help meet the benchmarks for consolation/surgery. This study aimed to determine the impact of prioritization on receiving consultation and surgery within the benchmarks. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study for which two administration databases were linked. Logistic regression was used to investigate the impact of prioritization on receiving consultations and surgery within the benchmarks of 90 and 182 days, respectively, adjusting for patients' characteristics and preference for surgeon. Results: 1,967 patients were included in this study. The odds ratios of having consultation within 90 days for hip replacement patients in priorities 1 and 2 (high priority) were 57.24 (CI: 23.16-141.47) and 14.63 (CI: 6.44-33.25), respectively, compared with those in priority 3. For knee replacement, patients with higher priority were more likely to have consultation within 90 days. Although priority levels were not related to having surgery within 182 days for knee replacement, hip replacement patients with priority 1 (CI: 0.2-0.75) and 2 (CI: 0.16-0.54) were less likely to have surgery within 182 days, compared with those with priority 3. Conclusion: Patients with high priority levels were more likely to have consultation within 90 days for hip and knee replacements. SEM may not help have surgery within 182 days. Prioritization has no impact on receiving surgery within 182 days for knee replacement, but hip replacement patients with high priority were less likely to have surgery within 182 days.

Indexed as

Canadahip replacement surgeryknee replacement surgerylogistic regressionNewfoundlandpatientspriority levelsingle‐entry modelwait time

Identifiers

PMID40496282
PMCPMC12039719

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.