Surgical audit of a single-surgeon experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy in northern Saskatchewan, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: This study reviewed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the clinical practice of a single general surgeon in northern Saskatchewan, Canada. Methods: Data were accumulated from the electronic medical records (EMRs) software and health records (HRs) department of the Victoria Hospital. This audit searched for all laparoscopic cholecystectomies between the years 2009 and 2016 inclusive. Results: Two hundred and ninety laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed over 7 years. They were analyzed for various aspects such as age, with the majority of patients between 41and 65years, and gender, with the female gender in 71.8% of cases. Our complication rates in both elective and emergency procedures, along with conversion (1.37%) and reoperation (1.03%) rates, were examined. The lengths of stay in elective (1.02 days) and emergency (2.13 days) surgeries were comparable to the reported literature. We examined associated procedures performed with the laparoscopic cholecystectomy, procedure duration, converted surgeries, and reoperated patients, as well as the referral rate of patients to a quaternary care hospital for super specialist evaluation and management not available locally. Biliary leakage was diagnosed in four cases postoperatively (1.37%), showing similar trends to published literature rates varying from 0.56% to 3.5%. Conclusion: In Prince Albert Parkland health region, even with limited resources in a small city such as Prince Albert in northern Saskatchewan and great distances between the two health care centers, it is possible to provide a high standard of surgical care for the population with results comparable to published international standards in minimally invasive gallbladder surgery. Keywords: surgical audit, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, rural surgery, audit database
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".