↓ Skip to main content

Identifying older adults at risk of harm following elective surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
21 news outlets
twitter
122 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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.
Title
Identifying older adults at risk of harm following elective surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12916-017-0986-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Watt, Andrea C. Tricco, Catherine Talbot-Hamon, Ba’ Pham, Patricia Rios, Agnes Grudniewicz, Camilla Wong, Douglas Sinclair, Sharon E. Straus

Abstract

Elective surgeries can be associated with significant harm to older adults. The present study aimed to identify the prognostic factors associated with the development of postoperative complications among older adults undergoing elective surgery. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and AgeLine were searched for articles published between inception and April 21, 2016. Prospective studies reporting prognostic factors associated with postoperative complications (composite outcome of medical and surgical complications), functional decline, mortality, post-hospitalization discharge destination, and prolonged hospitalization among older adults undergoing elective surgery were included. Study characteristics and prognostic factors associated with the outcomes of interest were extracted independently by two reviewers. Random effects meta-analysis models were used to derive pooled effect estimates for prognostic factors and incidences of adverse outcomes. Of the 5692 titles and abstracts that were screened for inclusion, 44 studies (12,281 patients) reported on the following adverse postoperative outcomes: postoperative complications (n =28), postoperative mortality (n = 11), length of hospitalization (n = 21), functional decline (n = 6), and destination at discharge from hospital (n = 13). The pooled incidence of postoperative complications was 25.17% (95% confidence interval (CI) 18.03-33.98%, number needed to follow = 4). The geriatric syndromes of frailty (odds ratio (OR) 2.16, 95% CI 1.29-3.62) and cognitive impairment (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.44-2.81) were associated with developing postoperative complications; however, there was no association with traditionally assessed prognostic factors such as age (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.14) or American Society of Anesthesiologists status (OR 2.62, 95% CI 0.78-8.79). Besides frailty, other potentially modifiable prognostic factors, including depressive symptoms (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.22-2.56) and smoking (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.32-4.46), were also associated with developing postoperative complications. Geriatric syndromes are important prognostic factors for postoperative complications. We identified potentially modifiable prognostic factors (e.g., frailty, depressive symptoms, and smoking) associated with developing postoperative complications that can be targeted preoperatively to optimize care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 122 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Master 14 13%
Other 14 13%
Student > Postgraduate 12 11%
Researcher 10 9%
Other 25 23%
Unknown 19 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Psychology 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 28 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 236. 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 31 August 2020.
All research outputs
#79,330
of 16,602,274 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#77
of 2,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,393
of 412,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#9
of 212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,602,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 412,906 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 212 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.