scholarly journals Hospital length of stay following first-time elective open posterior lumbar fusion in elderly patients: a retrospective analysis of the associated clinical factors

Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (44) ◽  
pp. e17740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haibo Zhan ◽  
Runsheng Guo ◽  
Huaen Xu ◽  
Xuqiang Liu ◽  
Xiaolong Yu ◽  
...  
Spine ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 497-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryce A. Basques ◽  
Michael C. Fu ◽  
Rafael A. Buerba ◽  
Daniel D. Bohl ◽  
Nicholas S. Golinvaux ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary M. Deboard ◽  
Jonathan Grotts ◽  
Lisa Ferrigno

With increasing life expectancy, the elderly are participating in recreational activities traditionally pursued by younger persons. Elderly patients have many reasons for worse outcomes after trauma, one of which may be the rising use of anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet medications. This study aimed to determine whether preinjury use of these agents yielded worse outcomes in geriatric patients injured during high-impact recreational activities. The National Trauma Data Bank was reviewed from 2007 to 2010 for patients ≥65 years admitted to Level I or II trauma centers with ICD-9 E-codes for specific mechanisms of injury. These included motorcycles, bicycles, snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, equestrian, water and alpine skiing, snowboarding, and others. Patients with preinjury bleeding disorder (BD), including warfarin and clopidogrel use, were compared with controls via a coarsened exact matching analysis. BD patients (294) were compared with 3929 controls. Although increased in BD patients, no significant mortality differences were observed in unmatched or matched analyses. BD patients yielded greater hospital length of stay (5 vs 4 days, P = 0.020) with increased odds of receiving five units or more of blood (7.0% vs 2.1%, odds ratio = 4.7, P < 0.001) and of deep vein thrombosis (7.6% vs 3.8%, odds ratio = 2.1, P = 0.018). Elderly patients with BD, including warfarin or clopidogrel use, do not seem to have significantly increased mortality after injury during specified recreational activities. BD patients had greater hospital length of stay, transfusion requirements, and deep vein thrombosis rates. These findings may inform counseling for those taking such medications as to the potential for adverse outcomes.


Spine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Bradywood ◽  
Farrokh Farrokhi ◽  
Barbara Williams ◽  
Mark Kowalczyk ◽  
C. Craig Blackmore

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Lu ◽  
Erica Bertoncini

Abstract INTRODUCTION Spine surgery traditionally relies on opioid analgesics for postoperative pain management. Opioids are associated with prolonged hospital stays and opioid use disorders. Opioid-focused prescribing habits in surgery have partially contributed to the opioid epidemic. METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed comparing patients receiving a multimodal analgesia regimen after lumbar fusion surgery vs control group receiving standard analgesia regimen. The multimodal regimen consisted of Acetaminophen 975 mg TID, Toradol 7.5 mg Q6 hours for 24-ho followed by Celebrex 100 mg BID for 7-d, Robaxin 500 mg Q6 hours prn for muscle spasms, Gabapentin 300 mg/100 mg TID for 4-wk, and prn narcotic. The standard regimen consisted of Acetaminophen 975 mg TID, narcotic prn, and muscle relaxant prn. There were 12 patients in the multimodal group and 26 patients in the control group evaluated over 3-mo and 6-mo time periods respectively. Primary outcomes included hospital length-of-stay, total and IV narcotic requirements in Morphine Milligram Equivalent (MME), and VASS pain scores. RESULTS Study results demonstrate differences between patient populations when focusing on the opioid-naïve participants. Opioid-naïve patients in the multimodal group were found to have significantly lower IV narcotic requirement than the control (0.22+/−0.67 mg/d for multimodal vs 5.36+/−5.56 mg/d for standard group, P-value = .001). These patients also had shorter hospital stays than the control (2.78+/−0.83 d for multimodal vs 3.53+/−1.17 d for standard group) but the difference was just below our threshold for significance (P-value = .066). Including both opioid-naïve and opioid-tolerant patients, no significant differences were found in hospital length-of-stay, MME, IV narcotic requirement nor VASS score between the multimodal group and the control groups (P-values of .46, .81, .36, and .91, respectively). CONCLUSION Overall, the study favors using multimodal analgesia in those undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgeries as evident by considerably reduced IV narcotic requirement and nearly significant shortened hospital length-of-stay in opioid-naïve patients compared to control.


2013 ◽  
Vol 119 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatyana Kopyeva ◽  
Daniel I. Sessler ◽  
Stephanie Weiss ◽  
Jarrod E. Dalton ◽  
Edward J. Mascha ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Volatile anesthetic prices differ substantially. But differences in drug-acquisition cost would be inconsequential if hospitalization were prolonged by more soluble anesthetics. The authors tested the hypothesis that the duration of hospitalization is prolonged with isoflurane anesthesia. Methods: Initially, the authors queried their electronic records and used propensity matching to generate homogeneous sets of adults having inpatient noncardiac surgery who were given desflurane, sevoflurane, and isoflurane. The authors then conducted a prospective alternating intervention trial in which adults (mostly having colorectal surgery) were assigned to isoflurane or sevoflurane, based on protocol. Results: In the retrospective analysis, 2,898 matched triplets were identified among 43,352 adults, each containing one patient receiving isoflurane, desflurane, and sevoflurane, respectively. The adjusted geometric mean (95% CI) hospital length-of-stay for the isoflurane cases was 2.85 days (2.78–2.93); this was longer than that observed for both desflurane (2.64 [2.57–2.72]; P &lt; 0.001) and sevoflurane (2.55 [2.48–2.62]; P &lt; 0.001). In the prospective trial (N = 1,584 operations), no difference was found; the adjusted ratio of means (95% CI) of hospital length-of-stay in patients receiving isoflurane versus sevoflurane was 0.98 (0.88–1.10), P = 0.77, with adjusted geometric means (95% CI) estimated at 4.1 (3.8–4.4) and 4.2 days (3.8–4.5), respectively. Conclusions: Results of the propensity-matched retrospective analysis suggested that avoiding isoflurane significantly reduced the duration of hospitalization. In contrast, length-of-stay was comparable in our prospective trial. Volatile anesthetic choice should not be based on concerns about the duration of hospitalization. These studies illustrate the importance of following even the best retrospective analysis with a prospective trial.


2015 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-308
Author(s):  
Heather Logghe ◽  
John Maa ◽  
Michael McDermott ◽  
Michael Oh ◽  
Jonathan Carter

Open revision of abdominal shunts is associated with increased risk of wound infection, visceral injury, hernia, and shunt complications. We hypothesized that laparoscopic revision mitigates these risks to a level similar to initial (i.e., first-time) shunt placement. This was a single-center, multisurgeon, retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent either laparoscopic initial shunt placement or laparoscopic shunt revision over a 5-year period. Outcomes were operative time, length of stay, and 30-day complication rate. Sixty-nine patients underwent laparoscopic shunt revision and 99 patients underwent laparoscopic initial shunt placement. Operative times were nearly identical (75 vs 73 minutes, P = 0.63). There were no significant differences in blood loss or hospital length of stay. Abdominal complications and total complications did not differ between groups. Laparoscopic shunt revision avoided many of the known complications of open shunt revision and had outcomes similar to initial laparoscopic shunt placement.


2010 ◽  
Vol 122 (4) ◽  
pp. 186-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siobhan H. M. Brown ◽  
Umbreen Hafeez ◽  
Ahmed H. Abdelhafiz

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hoyt Burdick ◽  
Eduardo Pino ◽  
Denise Gabel-Comeau ◽  
Andrea McCoy ◽  
Carol Gu ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo validate performance of a machine learning algorithm for severe sepsis determination up to 48 hours before onset, and to evaluate the effect of the algorithm on in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmission.SettingThis cohort study includes a combined retrospective analysis and clinical outcomes evaluation: a dataset containing 510,497 patient encounters from 461 United States health centers for retrospective analysis, and a multiyear, multicenter clinical data set of real-world data containing 75,147 patient encounters from nine hospitals for clinical outcomes evaluation.ParticipantsFor retrospective analysis, 270,438 adult patients with at least one documented measurement of five out of six vital sign measurements were included. For clinical outcomes analysis, 17,758 adult patients who met two or more Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria at any point during their stay were included.ResultsAt severe sepsis onset, the MLA demonstrated an AUROC of 0.91 (95% CI 0.90, 0.92), which exceeded those of MEWS (0.71, P<001), SOFA (0.74; P<.001), and SIRS (0.62; P<.001). For severe sepsis prediction 48 hours in advance of onset, the MLA achieved an AUROC of 0.77 (95% CI 0.73, 0.80). For the clinical outcomes study, when using the MLA, hospitals saw an average 39.5% reduction of in-hospital mortality, a 32.3% reduction in hospital length of stay, and a 22.7% reduction in 30-day readmission rate.ConclusionsThe MLA accurately predicts severe sepsis onset up to 48 hours in advance using only readily available vital signs in retrospective validation. Reductions of in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmissions were observed in real-world clinical use of the MLA. Results suggest this system may improve severe sepsis detection and patient outcomes over the use of rules-based sepsis detection systems.KEY POINTSQuestionIs a machine learning algorithm capable of accurate severe sepsis prediction, and does its clinical implementation improve patient mortality rates, hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmission rates?FindingsIn a retrospective analysis that included datasets containing a total of 585,644 patient encounters from 461 hospitals, the machine learning algorithm demonstrated an AUROC of 0.93 at time of severe sepsis onset, which exceeded those of MEWS (0.71), SOFA (0.74), and SIRS (0.62); and an AUROC of 0.77 for severe sepsis prediction 48 hours in advance of onset. In an analysis of real-world data from nine hospitals across 75,147 patient encounters, use of the machine learning algorithm was associated with a 39.5% reduction in in-hospital mortality, a 32.3% reduction in hospital length of stay, and a 22.7% reduction in 30-day readmission rate.MeaningThe accurate and predictive nature of this algorithm may encourage early recognition of patients trending toward severe sepsis, and therefore improve sepsis related outcomes.STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDYA retrospective study of machine learning severe sepsis prediction from a dataset with 510,497 patient encounters demonstrates high accuracy up to 48 hours prior to onset.A multicenter clinical study of real-world data using this machine learning algorithm for severe sepsis alerts achieved reductions of in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and 30-day readmissions.The required presence of an ICD-9 code to classify a patient as severely septic in our retrospective analysis potentially limits our ability to accurately classify all patients.Only adults in US hospitals were included in this study.For the real-world section of the study, we cannot eliminate the possibility that implementation of a sepsis algorithm raised general awareness of sepsis within a hospital, which may lead to higher recognition of septic patients, independent of algorithm performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document