ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2026
Retrospective empirical analysis of the success rate of inguinal hernia operations in outpatient and inpatient sectors: a cohort study.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn Germany, the proportion of outpatient surgeries was low during the study period (2014-2019) and low by international standards. Less than 20% of inguinal hernias are treated on an outpatient basis. Hybrid DRGs are intended to promote outpatient treatment, but their impact on the quality of care and referral criteria has not been sufficiently investigated empirically.
methodsA retrospective analysis of routine data included 90,512 cases from 41 company health insurance funds, spanning 2014 to 2019. These were analysed descriptively in terms of care sector, age, and surgical procedure, as well as through two logistic regressions on reoperations and complications, including interaction effects.
resultsThe proportion of outpatient surgeries is already below 40 % in adults and continues to decline with increasing age. The choice of procedure differs significantly between sectors. The regressions explain only 3.3 % and 4 % of the variance, respectively, meaning that the variables have only a minor impact on the success of the surgery. Inpatient surgeries are associated with fewer reoperations and more complications, although the absolute effect size is small. The surgical procedures have a significant influence. There are no relevant interaction effects between the choice of sector and the other variables. DISCUSSION: A sector-specific allocation based on the analysed parameters cannot be justified based on evidence. Since inpatient procedures do not show consistent superiority, there is no medical advantage over outpatient procedures. A cost-adjusted design of hybrid DRGs appears necessary to enable indication-appropriate procedure selection and to avoid potential misguided incentives that compromise the quality of care.
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.