Costs and Length of Stay for the Acute Care of Patients with Motor-Complete Spinal Cord Injury Following Cervical Trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Acute spinal cord injury (SCI) centers aim to optimize outcome following SCI. However, there is no timeframe to transfer patients from regional to SCI centers in order to promote cost-efficiency of acute care. Our objective was to compare costs and length of stay (LOS) following early and late transfer to the SCI center. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study involving 116 individuals was conducted. Group 1 (n = 87) was managed in an SCI center promptly after the trauma, whereas group 2 (n = 29) was transferred to the SCI center only after surgery. Direct comparison and multivariate linear regression analyses were used to assess the relationship between costs, LOS, and timing to transfer to the SCI center. RESULTS: Length of stay was significantly longer for group 2 (median, 93.0 days) as compared with group 1 (median, 40.0 days; P < 10), and average costs were also higher (median, Canadian $17,920.0 vs. $10,521.6; P = 0.004) for group 2, despite similar characteristics. Late transfer to the SCI center was the main predictive factor of longer LOS and increased costs. CONCLUSIONS: Early admission to the SCI center was associated with shorter LOS and lower costs for patients sustaining tetraplegia. Early referral to an SCI center before surgery could lower the financial burden for the health care system. TO CLAIM CME CREDITS: Complete the self-assessment activity and evaluation online at http://www.physiatry.org/JournalCME CME OBJECTIVES: Upon completion of this article, the reader should be able to: (1) Determine the optimal timing for transfer of individuals with cervical traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) in order to decrease acute care resource utilization; (2) Determine benefits of a complete perioperative management in a specialized SCI center; and (3) Identify factors that may influence resource utilization for acute care following motor-complete tetraplegia. LEVEL: Advanced ACCREDITATION: The Association of Academic Physiatrists is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.The Association of Academic Physiatrists designates this activity for a maximum of 1.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".