| Title |
Surgeon Volume Correlates with Reduced Mortality and Improved Quality in the Surgical Management of Diverticulitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11605-015-2990-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rachelle N. Damle, Julie M. Flahive, Jennifer S. Davids, W. Brian Sweeney, Paul R. Sturrock, Justin A. Maykel, Karim Alavi |
| Abstract |
Volume has been shown to be an important determinant of quality and cost outcomes. We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent surgery for diverticulitis using the University HealthSystem Consortium database from 2008-2012. Outcomes evaluated included minimally invasive approach, stoma creation, intensive-care admission, post-operative complications, length of stay, and total direct hospital costs by surgeon volume. Surgeon volume was categorized into four categories by mean annual volumes: very-high (VHVS) (>31), high (HVS) (13-31), medium (MVS) (6-12), and low (LVS) (≤5). A total of 19,212 patients with a mean age of 59 years, 54 % female makeup, and 55 % rate of private insurance were included. Similar to the unadjusted analysis, multivariable analysis revealed decreasing odds of stoma creation, complications, ICU admission, reoperation, readmission, and inpatient mortality with increasing surgeon volume. Additionally, compared with LVS, a higher surgeon volume was associated with higher rates of the minimally invasive approach. Median length of stay and costs were also notably lower with increasing surgeon volume. Quality and the use of minimally invasive technique are tightly associated with surgeon volume. Further studies are necessary to validate the direct association of volume with outcomes in surgery for diverticulitis. |
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 | 2 | 33% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 24% |
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 29% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 65% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 6% |
| Engineering | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 March 2016.
All research outputs
#8,483,362
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#750
of 2,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,515
of 406,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#10
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,489 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 406,613 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.