ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2025
Prolonged hospitalization in Brazil: clinical need or systemic failure?
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProlonged hospitalization increases the risk of adverse events and resource overuse. In dual public-private systems like Brazil's, it is unclear how much hospital length of stay reflects clinical needs versus systemic delays.
objectiveThe aim of the study was to quantify clinical and non-clinical contributions to length of stay in medical inpatients and compare patterns between public (Unified Health System [SUS]) and privately insured patients.
methodsWe conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study including 5,423 adults admitted via the emergency department to internal medicine wards in three Brazilian hospitals (2009-2022). Physicians recorded daily whether ongoing hospitalization was clinically necessary or due to delays (e.g., tests, specialist input, administrative or social issues). Statistical analyses included multivariate models adjusted for comorbidities and frailty.
resultsThe mean length of stay was 11.8±5.2 days, but only 38% (4.5±2.6 days) were clinically justified. The remainder resulted from non-clinical delays, particularly in diagnostics (2.9±3.1 days) and specialist input (1.9±1.5 days). SUS patients had longer stays than those privately insured (13.2 vs. 10.1 days; p<0.001), despite similar clinical complexity. These differences remained significant after adjustment. SUS patients were more likely to stay ≥12 days (OR 1.76), wait ≥3 days for tests (OR 1.89), and ≥2 days for specialist evaluations (OR 1.67).
conclusionMost hospital days were not due to clinical needs. Diagnostic and specialist delays, especially in the public system, were key contributors to prolonged length of stay, highlighting structural inefficiencies and the need for system-wide reforms.
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.