MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281705851 · doi:10.1016/j.asmr.2022.02.001

Increased Readmission Rates but No Difference in Complication Rates in Patients Undergoing Inpatient Versus Outpatient Hip Arthroscopy: A Large Matched‐Cohort Insurance Database Analysis

2022· article· en· W4281705851 on OpenAlexaff
Elyse J. Berlinberg, Enrico M. Forlenza, Harsh H. Patel, Ruby Ross, Randy Mascarenhas, Jorge Chahla, Shane J. Nho, Brian Forsythe

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersJohnson and JohnsonAmerican Orthopaedic Society for Sports MedicineSmith and NephewStrykerAmgenPfizerArthroscopy Association of North AmericaArthrexInternational Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports MedicineAmerican Orthopaedic Association
KeywordsMedicineComorbidityOdds ratioCohortInternal medicineConfidence intervalCoronary artery diseaseSurgeryIntensive care unit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To compare the early postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing inpatient versus outpatient hip arthroscopy and identify any characteristics that may serve as predictors of these complications Methods The PearlDiver Mariner insurance database was queried for all patients who underwent hip arthroscopy from 2010 to 2019. Patients were matched based on Charlson Comorbidity Index, age, and sex. Outcomes recorded included postoperative complications and return to care within 90 days. Predictors of complications were assessed via multivariable logistic regression controlling for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, comorbidities, surgical setting, and procedure type Results The final matched cohort included 832 inpatients and 1,356 matched patients. Fifty‐eight patients (7.0%) who underwent inpatient surgery versus 25 patients (1.8%) who underwent outpatient surgery were readmitted ( P < .01). Of the readmitted patients, 31 inpatients (3.7%) and 5 outpatients (0.4%) were readmitted for hip‐related reasons ( P < .01). No significant differences were observed in emergency department visits (67 inpatients [8.1%] vs 84 outpatients [6.2%], P = .11), intensive care unit admissions (3 [0.4%] vs 1 [0.1%], P = .31), or revision hip arthroscopies (43 [5.2%] vs 65 [4.8%], P = .77). A multivariable model of complications correcting for baseline differences in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, diabetes, hypertension, ischemic heart disease, tobacco use, and inpatient status found that age (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85‐0.99; P = .03), coronary artery disease (adjusted OR, 12.82; 95% CI, 1.18‐140.02; P = .03), and inpatient setting (adjusted OR, 20.59; 95% CI, 3.48‐401.65; P = .01) were significantly associated with complications. No procedure type was associated with complication rates Conclusions Compared with the outpatient setting, inpatient hip arthroscopy is associated with higher rates of readmission in a cohort matched for age, sex, and comorbidities. Complications after inpatient hip arthroscopy appear to be related to comorbidities rather than procedure‐related factors. The decision to conduct an inpatient hip arthroscopy should prioritize consideration of patient comorbidities over the type of procedure Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective cohort study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy Sports Medicine and RehabilitationSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207