↓ Skip to main content

Outcomes of Daytime Procedures Performed by Attending Surgeons after Night Work

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, August 2015
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 (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
283 tweeters
facebook
14 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
215 Mendeley
Title
Outcomes of Daytime Procedures Performed by Attending Surgeons after Night Work
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, August 2015
DOI 10.1056/nejmsa1415994
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anand Govindarajan, David R. Urbach, Matthew Kumar, Qi Li, Brian J. Murray, David Juurlink, Erin Kennedy, Anna Gagliardi, Rinku Sutradhar, Nancy N. Baxter

Abstract

Background Sleep loss in attending physicians has an unclear effect on patient outcomes. In this study, we examined the effect of medical care provided by physicians after midnight on the outcomes of their scheduled elective procedures performed during the day. Methods We conducted a population-based, retrospective, matched-cohort study in Ontario, Canada. Patients undergoing 1 of 12 elective daytime procedures performed by a physician who had treated patients from midnight to 7 a.m. were matched in a 1:1 ratio to patients undergoing the same procedure by the same physician on a day when the physician had not treated patients after midnight. Outcomes included death, readmission, complications, length of stay, and procedure duration. We used generalized estimating equations to compare outcomes between patient groups. Results We included 38,978 patients, treated by 1448 physicians, in the study, of whom 40.6% were treated at an academic center. We found no significant difference in the primary outcome (death, readmission, or complication) between patients who underwent a daytime procedure performed by a physician who had provided patient care after midnight and those who underwent a procedure performed by a physician who had not treated patients after midnight (22.2% and 22.4%, respectively; P=0.66; adjusted odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.95 to 1.03). We also found no significant difference in outcomes after stratification for academic versus nonacademic center, physician's age, or type of procedure. Secondary analyses revealed no significant difference between patient groups in length of stay or procedure duration. Conclusions Overall, the risks of adverse outcomes of elective daytime procedures were similar whether or not the physician had provided medical services the previous night. (Funded by the University of Toronto Dean's Fund and others.).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 283 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 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 201 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 32 15%
Other 29 13%
Researcher 28 13%
Student > Master 25 12%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Other 60 28%
Unknown 19 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 127 59%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 10%
Psychology 6 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Engineering 5 2%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 31 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 276. 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 16 January 2021.
All research outputs
#68,620
of 17,463,360 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#1,980
of 28,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,078
of 244,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#32
of 361 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,463,360 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 28,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 92.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 244,960 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 361 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 91% of its contemporaries.