MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011443028 · doi:10.1089/end.2019.0684

Ambulatory-Based Bladder Outlet Procedures Offer Significant Cost Savings and Comparable 30-Day Outcomes Relative to Inpatient Procedures

2020· article· en· W3011443028 on OpenAlexaff
David‐Dan Nguyen, Maya Marchese, Manuel Ozambela, Naeem Bhojani, Gezzer Ortega, Quoc‐Dien Trinh, David F. Friedlander

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endourology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsMedicineAmbulatoryConfidence intervalOdds ratioPerioperativeEmergency medicineLogistic regressionHealthcare Cost and Utilization ProjectAmbulatory careInpatient careOddsHealth careSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction and Objectives: Budgetary constraints and novel minimally invasive surgical approaches have resulted in surgical care being increasingly provided at ambulatory centers rather than traditional inpatient settings. Despite increasing use of ambulatory-based procedure for bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) procedures, little is known about the effect of care setting on perioperative outcomes and costs. We sought to compare 30-day readmissions rates and costs of BOO procedure performed in the ambulatory vs inpatient setting. Methods: Using Florida and New York all-payer data from the 2014 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Databases, we identified patients who underwent transurethral resection, thermotherapy, or laser/photovaporization for BOO. Patient demographics, regional data, 30-day readmissions rates, and costs (from converted charges) associated with the index procedure and revisits were analyzed. Predictors of 30-day revisits were also identified by fitting a multivariate logistic regression model with facility-level clustering. Results: Of the 15,094 patients identified, 1444 (9.6%) had a 30-day revisit at a median cost of $4263.43. The 30-day readmission rate for inpatient cases was significantly higher than that of surgeries performed in the ambulatory setting (12.0% vs 8.1%, p < 0.001). Payer status (private vs Medicare: odds ratio [OR] = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62–0.95; p = 0.02) and index care setting (ambulatory vs inpatient: OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.40–0.57; p < 0.001) predicted 30-day revisits. Conclusions: We identified that index care setting and payer status are independent predictors of 30-day revisit after BOO procedure, with the inpatient setting and Medicare insurance associated with higher odds of revisit. Ambulatory procedures are significantly less costly than procedures performed in the inpatient setting, even after accounting for ambulatory procedures leading to an admission. There is an obvious cost benefit of offering BOO procedure in the ambulatory setting to the appropriate patient. In the context of value-based health care initiatives, our findings have important implications for policymakers seeking to reduce variation in nonclinical sources of perioperative costs and outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EndourologySame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207