| Title |
Impact of Interhospital Transfer on Outcomes in Non‐emergency Colorectal Surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-017-4313-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephen P. Sharp, Daniel J. Schuster, Ashar Ata, Brian T. Valerian, Jonathan J. Canete, A. David Chismark, Edward C. Lee |
| Abstract |
A paucity of data exists on the impact of transfer status on outcomes for patients undergoing non-emergency (urgent) colorectal surgery. This study characterized transferred patients undergoing urgent colorectal surgery and determined which patient comorbidities significantly contributed to poor outcomes. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2012 to 2013 was used. Urgent direct admissions undergoing colon, rectum, or small bowel operations were compared to urgent transfers using bivariate and multivariable analysis models. Primary outcomes were overall complications, hospital length of stay, and mortality. A total of 82,151 admissions were analyzed. After multivariable analysis, direct admission patients had nearly similar risk of complications (RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.91-0.99) and length of hospital stay (7% shorter; 95% CI 4-9%), as well as no difference in mortality (RR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.80-1.11). Transfer status alone confers minimal risk toward higher complication rates and longer hospital length of stay in patients undergoing urgent colorectal surgery, and the poor outcomes observed in this cohort are largely due to patient comorbidities and disease severity. Our results suggest that outcomes in transferred colorectal surgery patients undergoing urgent operations depend mainly on operative acuity and clinical factors, and to a lesser degree transfer status. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 38% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,337,294
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#2,529
of 4,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,667
of 328,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#56
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,368 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.