Patient reported outcomes in an elder-friendly surgical environment: Prospective, controlled before-after study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Acute Care for the Elderly (ACE) model has demonstrated clinical benefit, but there is little evidence regarding quality of life after discharge. The Elder-friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) study was conducted to assess implementation of an ACE unit on an acute surgical service. Improved clinical and economic outcomes have been demonstrated, but post-discharge patient reported outcomes have not yet been reported. METHODS: Prospective, concurrently controlled, before-after study at two tertiary care hospitals in Alberta, Canada. The SF-12, EQ-5D, Canadian Malnutrition Screening Tool (CMST) and patient satisfaction were collected from elderly (≥ 65 years old) patients, 6 weeks and 6 months after discharge from an acute care surgical service. A difference-in-difference (DID) method was used to analyze between-site effects. RESULTS: At six weeks, patient satisfaction was high at 68%-86%, with significant improvement Pre-to Post-EASE at the control site (p < 0.001), but not the intervention site (p = 0.06). For the intervention site, within-site adjusted pre-post effects were nonsignificant for all patient reported outcomes [EQ-Index Score β coefficient (SE): 0.042 (0.022); EQ-Visual Analog Scale: 0.10 (2.14); SF-12 Physical Component Score: -0.57 (0.84); SF-12 Mental Component Score: 1.17 (0.84); CMST Score: -0.39 (0.34)]. DID analyses were also non significant for all outcomes except for SF-12 Mental Component Score (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The clinically and economically beneficial EASE interventions do not appear to compromise quality of life, risk for malnutrition, or patient satisfaction in the post-discharge period. Further research with larger sample size is needed with comparisons to pre-intervention and the early post-discharge period.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".