ArticleBMC anesthesiology2025
The resource requirements of perioperative patient warming in German hospitals - the results of a prospective, multicenter activity-based costing study.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 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
backgroundPerioperative warming is essential in preventing hypothermia during surgery, a condition linked to adverse outcomes like increased infection rates, impaired coagulation, and extended hospital stays. Despite the availability of various active warming methods, such as forced-air warming (FAW) and electric warming systems, their implementation and associated costs vary significantly across hospitals, impacting resource allocation and patient care.
methodThis study used a prospective, multicenter, activity-based costing approach across four German hospitals with diverse capacities. The activity-based costing model identified and measured staff time, material use, and direct costs linked to perioperative warming processes in a sample of 225 surgical patients. Warming processes were assessed across stages, including pre-warming, intraoperative warming, and post-anesthesia care.
resultsFindings show significant variability in the time and cost associated with perioperative warming across institutions. The average total cost per patient between all sites ranged from EUR 3.52 to EUR 49.26, with an overall mean cost of EUR 12.29 per patient. Staff time also varied, with nurses contributing most of the required time dedicated to warming activities. At all sites, FAW was the available method during surgery, but inconsistent practices and reliance on supplemental strategies lead to considerable cost variations.
conclusionThis study illustrates potential operational and financial challenges of perioperative warming, revealing significant variability in costs and resource requirements across hospitals, influenced by institutional infrastructure, workflow efficiency and case mix. The findings also emphasize the importance of optimizing workflows and adopting best practices tailored to resource constraints. Future research should address these gaps by exploring cost-effective warming protocols, balancing efficiency with care quality, and refining workflows to enhance patient outcomes.
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.