Physical performance following acute high-risk abdominal surgery: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background:</h3> Acute high-risk abdominal (AHA) surgery is associated with high mortality, multiple postoperative complications and prolonged hospital stay. Further development of strategies for enhanced recovery programs following AHA surgery is needed. The aim of this study was to describe physical performance and barriers to independent mobilization among patients who received AHA surgery (postoperative days [POD] 1–7). <h3>Methods:</h3> Patients undergoing AHA surgery were consecutively enrolled from a university hospital in Denmark. In the first postoperative week, all patients were evaluated daily with regards to physical performance, using the Cumulated Ambulation Score (CAS; 0–6 points) to assess basic mobility and the activPAL monitor to assess the 24-hour physical activity level. We recorded barriers to independent mobilization. <h3>Results:</h3> Fifty patients undergoing AHA surgery (mean age 61.4 ± 17.2 years) were included. Seven patients died within the first postoperative week, and 15 of 43 (35%) patients were still not independently mobilized (CAS < 6) on POD-7, which was associated with pulmonary complications developing (53% v. 14% in those with CAS = 6, <i>p</i> = 0.012). The patients lay or sat for a median of 23.4 hours daily during the first week after AHA surgery, and the main barriers to independent mobilization were fatigue and abdominal pain. <h3>Conclusion:</h3> Patients who receive AHA surgery have very limited physical performance in the first postoperative week. Barriers to independent mobilization are primarily fatigue and abdominal pain. Further studies investigating strategies for early mobilization and barriers to mobilization in the immediate postoperative period after AHA surgery are needed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".