57 Safety and Cost Effectiveness of Outpatient Surgery in Acute Burn Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Outpatient burn surgery is increasingly utilized for delivery of acute burn care. Reports of its safety and efficacy are limited. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the safety and cost reduction associated with outpatient burn surgery and to describe our centre’s experience. Methods This was a single centre, retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent outpatient acute burn surgery requiring split thickness skin graft or dermal regenerative template from January 2010 - December 2018. Patients with insufficient follow up to evaluate operative site healing were excluded. Patient demographics, comorbidities, burn etiologies, operative data and postoperative care were reviewed. The primary outcome is complication involving major graft loss requiring reoperation. Results 165 patients and 173 procedures met the inclusion criteria. The average age was 44 years and 60.6% (100/165) were male. The number of annual outpatient procedures increased 48% from 23 to 34 cases over the 9-year period. The mean grafted total body surface area was 1.0 ± 0.9%. Rate of major graft loss requiring reoperation was 5.2% (9/172). Greater than 95% graft take was achieved in 80.9% of patients. Age, sex, co-morbidities, total body surface area, and procedure types were not significantly associated with postoperative complication rate. Outpatient burn surgery model was estimated to save CA$7,875 per patient from inpatient costs. This extrapolates to a total of over CA$1.36 million in savings over the 9-year study period. Conclusions Acute burn care at our centre is increasingly being delivered through an outpatient day surgery model. Our demonstration of its safety and considerable cost savings 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".