The impact of day of surgery on the length of stay for major urological procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Surgery performed later in the week has been associated with longer length of stay (LOS). The aim of this study was to assess if the day of the surgery impacted the LOS for two major urological procedures in a tertiary referral university teaching hospital. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of two major urological procedures consecutively performed by a single surgeon in our unit from March 2012 to December 2015. Patient demographics, histopathological characteristics, operative details, and LOS were obtained from the patients' medical records. Procedures performed on Monday or Tuesday were defined as early in the week and procedures performed on Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday were defined as late in the week. RESULTS: During the study period, 140 open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and 42 open partial nephrectomy (OPN) procedures were performed. There was a significant difference in median LOS for major urological procedures performed early in the week compared to late in the week (3 [3-4] days vs. 4 [4-5] days; p= 0.0001). There was a significant difference in median LOS for ORP performed early in the week compared to late in the week (3 [3-4] days vs. 4 [4-5] days; p= 0.0004). There was a similar significant difference in OPN performed early in the week compared to late in the week (4 [3-5.5] days vs. 5 [4-5] days; p= 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: The day of surgery impacts LOS for major urological procedures. Major procedures should be performed early in the week, when it is feasible to facilitate prompt safe discharge and better use of hospital resources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".