Exploring the Nexus: Socioeconomic Indices and Their Influence on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Oncologic Reconstructive Surgery at a Quaternary Care Center
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: The role of socio-environmental determinants in shaping postoperative outcomes, especially in the context of oncologic surgeries like lower extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS) reconstructions, warrants deeper exploration given their noted impact across various surgical disciplines (1). This research aims to dissect the connection between socioeconomic factors, as gauged by the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), and the outcomes reported by patients following their surgeries. METHODS: Our study was a single-institution, IRB-approved retrospective analysis of patients treated for lower extremity soft tissue sarcoma from 2016 to 2021. Data from 302 STS patients were analyzed for complications and patient-reported outcomes using PROMIS-29 (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) and TESS (Toronto Extremity Salvage Scale) surveys calibrated to 6 months postoperatively. Socioeconomic status (SES) was assessed through ADI and SVI scores, categorized into tertiles. Statistical analysis involved Chi-square, Fisher exact tests, and logistic regression using SPSS V26.0. RESULTS: Within the SVI categories for 302 patients, complication percentages were observed as follows: 33.3% in the high vulnerability group, 36.2% in the intermediate vulnerability group, and 42.6% in the low vulnerability group. Similarly, for ADI categories, the rates were 30.7% for the high deprivation group, 48.1% for the intermediate deprivation group, and 40.2% for the low deprivation group. The response rate for the TESS survey was recorded at 17.96%, with 46 out of 256 patients providing feedback. Similarly, the PROMIS-29 survey yielded a participation rate of 17.19%, with 44 out of 256 patients responding. The physical function domain in the PROMIS-29 survey revealed significant differences across ADI tertiles (p=0.035), with higher ADI associated with lower physical function scores, indicating a poorer quality of life. No significant differences were observed in other domains or across SVI tertiles. TESS scores did not vary significantly by SES, indicating uniform functional recovery irrespective of socioeconomic background. DISCUSSION: The minimal differences in patient-reported outcomes highlights the complex interplay of factors influencing postoperative recovery. The significant finding in the physical function domain among higher ADI tertiles suggests potential underreporting of difficulties by lower SES groups, possibly due to cognitive biases shaped by lifelong socioeconomic challenges (2). This underlines the necessity of incorporating socioeconomic awareness into surgical care to identify and address potential barriers to recovery, ensuring equitable patient outcomes. REFERENCES: 1. Mehaffey, J. H., Hawkins, R. B., Charles, E. J., et al. Socioeconomic “Distressed Communities Index” improves surgical risk adjustment. Annals of Surgery, 2020;271:470-474. 2. Hao, Y., Evans, G. W., Farah, M. J. Pessimistic cognitive biases mediate socioeconomic status and children’s mental health problems. Scientific Reports, 2023;13:5191.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».