MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223505591 · doi:10.1503/cjs.016420

Cost and safety of inpatient versus outpatient open reduction internal fixation of isolated ankle fractures

2022· article· en· W4223505591 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nicholas Pasic, Jason Akindolire, Laura Churchill, Silvio Ndoja, Christopher Del Balso, Abdel‐Rahman Lawendy, Brent A. Lanting, Ryan M. Degen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnkleInternal fixationAmbulatoryInpatient careCohortAmbulatory careOrthopedic surgeryEmergency medicineRetrospective cohort studySurgeryHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> As health care shifts to value-based models, one strategy within orthopedics has been to transition appropriate cases to outpatient or ambulatory settings to reduce costs; however, there are limited data on the efficacy and safety of this practice for isolated ankle fractures. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost and safety associated with inpatient versus outpatient ankle open reduction internal fixation (ORIF). <h3>Methods:</h3> All patients who underwent ORIF of isolated closed ankle fractures at 2 affiliated hospitals between April 2016 and March 2017 were identified retrospectively. Demographic characteristics, including age, gender, comorbidities and injuryspecific variables, were collected. We grouped patients based on whether they underwent ankle ORIF as an inpatient or outpatient. We determined case costing for all patients and analyzed it using multivariate regression analysis. <h3>Results:</h3> A total of 196 patients (125 inpatient, 71 outpatient) were included for analysis. Inpatients had a significantly longer mean length of stay than outpatients (54.3 h [standard deviation (SD) 36.3 h] v. 7.5 h [SD 1.7 h], <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). The average cost was significantly higher for the inpatient cohort than the outpatient cohort ($4137 [SD $2285] v. $1834 [SD $421], <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). There were more unimalleolar ankle fractures in the outpatient group than in the inpatient group (42 [59.2%] v. 41 [32.8%], <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Outpatients waited longer for surgery than inpatients (9.6 d [SD 5.6 d] v. 2.0 d [SD 3.3 d], <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Fourteen patients (11.2%) in the inpatient group presented to the emergency department or were readmitted to hospital within 30 days of discharge, compared to 5 (7.0%) in the outpatient group (<i>p</i> = 0.3). <h3>Conclusion:</h3> In the treatment of isolated closed ankle fractures, outpatient surgery was associated with a significant reduction in length of hospital stay and overall case cost compared to inpatient surgery, with no significant difference in readmission or reoperation rates. In medically appropriate patients, isolated ankle ORIF can be performed safely in an ambulatory setting and is associated with significant cost savings.

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)0.000
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 score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of SurgerySame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207