In-hospital mortality for aspiration pneumonia in a tertiary teaching hospital: A retrospective cohort review from 2008 to 2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aspiration pneumonia is a preventable condition that has higher rates of recurrence and mortality compared to non-aspiration pneumonia. The primary objective of the study was to examine independent patient factors that are associated with mortality in those requiring acute admission for aspiration pneumonia at a tertiary institution. Secondary goals of the study were to review whether factors such as mechanical ventilation and speech language pathology intervention can impact patient mortality, length of stay (LOS), and costs relating to hospitalization. METHODS: Patients older than 18 years of age who were admitted with a primary diagnosis of aspiration pneumonia from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2018 at Unity Health Toronto-St. Michael's hospital in Toronto, Canada, were included in the study. Descriptive analyses were performed on patient characteristics using age as a continuous variable as well as a dichotomous variable with age 65 as a cut-off. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent factors that contributed to in-hospital mortality and Cox proportional-hazard regression was used to identify independent factors that affected LOS. RESULTS: A total of 634 patients were included in this study. 134 (21.1%) patients died during hospitalization with an average age of 80.3 ± 13.4. The in-hospital mortality did not change significantly over the ten-year period (p = 0.718). Patients who died had longer LOS with a median length of 10.5 days (p = 0.012). Age [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.72, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 1.47-2.02, p < 0.05] and invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.54-4.31, p < 0.05) were independent predictors of mortality while female gender was found to be a protective factor (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38-0.92, p = 0.02). Elderly patients had five times higher risk of dying during their hospital course when compared to younger patients [Hazard Ratio (HR) 5.25, 95% CI 2.99-9.23, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Elderly patients are a high-risk population for developing aspiration pneumonia and are at higher risk of death when hospitalized for this condition. This warrants improved preventative strategies in the community. Further studies involving other institutions and creating a Canada-wide database are required.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".