↓ Skip to main content

Performing concurrent operations in academic vascular neurosurgery does not affect patient outcomes.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurosurgery, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Performing concurrent operations in academic vascular neurosurgery does not affect patient outcomes.
Published in
Journal of Neurosurgery, January 2017
DOI 10.3171/2016.6.jns16822
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

OBJECTIVE Concurrent surgeries, also known as "running two rooms" or simultaneous/overlapping operations, have recently come under intense scrutiny. The goal of this study was to evaluate the operative time and outcomes of concurrent versus nonconcurrent vascular neurosurgical procedures. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed 1219 procedures performed by 1 vascular neurosurgeon from 2012 to 2015 at the University of California, San Francisco. Data were collected on patient age, sex, severity of illness, risk of mortality, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, procedure type, admission type, insurance, transfer source, procedure time, presence of resident or fellow in operating room (OR), number of co-surgeons, estimated blood loss (EBL), concurrent vs nonconcurrent case, severe sepsis, acute respiratory failure, postoperative stroke causing neurological deficit, unplanned return to OR, 30-day mortality, and 30-day unplanned readmission. For aneurysm clipping cases, data were also obtained on intraoperative aneurysm rupture and postoperative residual aneurysm. Chi-square and t-tests were performed to compare concurrent versus nonconcurrent cases, and then mixed-effects models were created to adjust for different procedure types, patient demographics, and clinical indicators between the 2 groups. RESULTS There was a significant difference in procedure type for concurrent (n = 828) versus nonconcurrent (n = 391) cases. Concurrent cases were more likely to be routine/elective admissions (53% vs 35%, p < 0.001) and physician referrals (59% vs 38%, p < 0.001). This difference in patient/case type was also reflected in the lower severity of illness, risk of death, and ASA class in the concurrent versus nonconcurrent cases (p < 0.01). Concurrent cases had significantly longer procedural times (243 vs 213 minutes) and more unplanned 30-day readmissions (5.7% vs 3.1%), but shorter mean length of hospital stay (11.2 vs 13.7 days), higher rates of discharge to home (66% vs 51%), lower 30-day mortality rates (3.1% vs 6.1%), lower rates of acute respiratory failure (4.3% vs 8.2%), and decreased 30-day unplanned returns to the OR (3.3% vs 6.9%; all p < 0.05). Rates of severe sepsis, postoperative stroke, intraoperative aneurysm rupture, and postoperative aneurysm residual were equivalent between the concurrent and nonconcurrent groups (all p values nonsignificant). Mixed-effects models showed that after controlling for procedure type, patient demographics, and clinical indicators, there was no significant difference in acute respiratory failure, severe sepsis, 30-day readmission, postoperative stroke, EBL, length of stay, discharge status, or intraoperative aneurysm rupture between concurrent and nonconcurrent cases. Unplanned return to the OR and 30-day mortality were significantly lower in concurrent cases (odds ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.98, p = 0.0431, and odds ratio 0.81, p < 0.001, respectively), but concurrent cases had significantly longer procedure durations (odds ratio 21.73; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Overall, there was a significant difference in the types of concurrent versus nonconcurrent cases, with more routine/elective cases for less sick patients scheduled in an overlapping fashion. After adjusting for patient demographics, procedure type, and clinical indicators, concurrent cases had longer procedure times, but equivalent patient outcomes, as compared with nonconcurrent vascular neurosurgical procedures.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 15%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 39%
Neuroscience 5 11%
Engineering 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 14 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 05 February 2017.
All research outputs
#7,168,593
of 34,365,356 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurosurgery
#2,320
of 8,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,012
of 465,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurosurgery
#71
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,365,356 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 465,874 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.