MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197397083 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2021.08.013

Nurse Staffing Practices and Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation Among Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Multisite Cohort Study

2021· article· en· W3197397083 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Christian M. Rochefort, Jonathan Bourgon Labelle, Paul Farand

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationMedicineCardiac surgeryStaffingCohortCardiologyInternal medicineEmergency medicineNursingIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a frequent complication of cardiac surgery that is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and costs. Recent studies suggest that nurse staffing practices are associated with adverse postoperative events, but whether these practices are also related to POAF occurrence is unknown. Methods To fill this knowledge gap, a cohort of 6401 cardiac surgery patients admitted to 2 Canadian university health centres (UHC A and UHC B) between 2014 and 2018 was studied. Patients' cumulative exposure to 4 staffing practices (registered nurse [RN] understaffing, education, experience, and non-RN skill mix) was measured every shift over the first 6 postoperative days, during which 96% of POAF cases occur. The associations of these exposures with in-hospital POAF occurrence were estimated using site-specific multivariable logistic regression models and a mixed-effect model combining data from both sites. Results Overall, 563 (27.2%) and 1336 (30.8%) cases of POAF occurred at UHC A and UHC B, respectively. In site-specific models, every 5% increase in the cumulative proportion of understaffed shifts over the first 6 postoperative days was associated with a 3.5% increase in the odds of POAF (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for UHC A: 1.035; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.000-1.070, P = 0.0472; aOR for UHC B: 1.035; 95% CI: 1.013-1.057, P = 0.0019). In the mixed-effect model combining data from both sites, RN understaffing remained significant and was associated with a 3.1% increase in the odds of POAF (aOR: 1.031; 95% CI: 1.014-1.048, P = 0.0003). No other staffing practices were significantly associated with POAF occurrence. Conclusion Higher RN understaffing postoperatively is associated with increased POAF occurrence among cardiac surgery patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207