Safety and Cost-Effectiveness of Outpatient Surgery in Acute Burn Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Outpatient burn surgery is increasingly used in acute burn care. Reports of its safety and efficacy are limited. This study aims to evaluate the safety and cost reduction associated with outpatient burn surgery and to describe our center's experience. This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent outpatient burn surgery requiring split-thickness skin graft or dermal regenerative template from January 2010 to December 2018. Patient demographics, comorbidities, burn etiologies, operative data, and postoperative care were reviewed. The primary outcome is complications involving major graft loss requiring reoperation. One hundred and sixty-five patients and 173 procedures met the inclusion criteria. The average age was 44 years and 60.6% (100/165) were male. Annual outpatient procedure volume increased 48% from 23 to 34 cases over the 9-year period. The median (interquartile range) grafted percentage total body surface area was 1.0 (1.0)%. Rate of major graft loss requiring reoperation was 5.2% (9/172) and the most common site was the lower extremity (8/9, 88.9%). Age, sex, comorbidities, total body surface area, and procedure types were not significantly associated with postoperative complication rates. The outpatient burn surgery model was estimated to save CA$8170 per patient from inpatient costs. Demonstration of the safety and cost savings associated with outpatient acute burn surgery is compelling for further utilization. Our experience found the adoption of improved dressing care, appropriate patient selection, increased patient education, adequate pain control, and regimented outpatient multidisciplinary care to be fundamental for effective outpatient surgical burn care.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".