门诊和住院小儿极化手术后90天再入院和急诊的比较研究。

IF 0.3 Q4 SURGERY
Journal of Hand and Microsurgery Pub Date : 2024-11-13 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jham.2024.100176
Julia C Mastracci, Eliana B Saltzman, Kirby W Bonvillain, Katherine D Drexelius, Julie C Woodside, R Christopher Chadderdon, Peter M Waters, R Glenn Gaston
{"title":"门诊和住院小儿极化手术后90天再入院和急诊的比较研究。","authors":"Julia C Mastracci, Eliana B Saltzman, Kirby W Bonvillain, Katherine D Drexelius, Julie C Woodside, R Christopher Chadderdon, Peter M Waters, R Glenn Gaston","doi":"10.1016/j.jham.2024.100176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transition to outpatient surgery has grown with an emphasis on delivery of safe, high-quality medical care. The purpose of this study is to compare 90-day emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and complications between patients undergoing outpatient versus inpatient pollicization surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single institution database was queried for primary thumb pollicization from 2010 to 2022 in patients under 18 years of age. Standard demographic data, comorbidities, surgical information, and discharge disposition were collected. Primary outcome measures were complications including ED visits, unplanned reoperations and hospital readmissions within 90-days of index procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven patients underwent pollicization surgery. Twenty patients were outpatient surgery while 7 had postoperative hospital admission, defined as an overnight hospital stay. The outpatient cohort had no major postoperative complications including no ED visits, reoperations or readmissions within 90 days of index procedure. One outpatient experienced swelling around bilateral thumb pin sites without infection or vascular compromise. One inpatient represented to the ED within 90 days of surgery for bilateral hand cellulitis.All patients with ASA I classification were performed outpatient. Three of 7 inpatients (43 %) had congenital heart disease versus 5 of the 20 (25 %) outpatients. There was a trend that inpatients were younger than the outpatient cohort (19 vs. 33 months). The average length of procedure in the inpatient cohort was significantly longer than the outpatient cohort (237 vs. 173 min). Pollicizations performed between 2017 and 2022 were more likely to be outpatient than those performed between 2010 and 2016.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>On properly selected patients, outpatient pollicization appears to be a safe option. Patients with longer operative times were more likely to require postoperative hospital admission. Over the study years evaluated at our institution, pollicization procedures were more likely to be performed outpatient, reflecting an evolution of our practice.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, retrospective cohort study.</p>","PeriodicalId":45368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery","volume":"17 1","pages":"100176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11770200/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison study of 90-day readmission and emergency department visitation after outpatient versus inpatient pediatric pollicization surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Julia C Mastracci, Eliana B Saltzman, Kirby W Bonvillain, Katherine D Drexelius, Julie C Woodside, R Christopher Chadderdon, Peter M Waters, R Glenn Gaston\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jham.2024.100176\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transition to outpatient surgery has grown with an emphasis on delivery of safe, high-quality medical care. The purpose of this study is to compare 90-day emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and complications between patients undergoing outpatient versus inpatient pollicization surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single institution database was queried for primary thumb pollicization from 2010 to 2022 in patients under 18 years of age. Standard demographic data, comorbidities, surgical information, and discharge disposition were collected. Primary outcome measures were complications including ED visits, unplanned reoperations and hospital readmissions within 90-days of index procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven patients underwent pollicization surgery. Twenty patients were outpatient surgery while 7 had postoperative hospital admission, defined as an overnight hospital stay. The outpatient cohort had no major postoperative complications including no ED visits, reoperations or readmissions within 90 days of index procedure. One outpatient experienced swelling around bilateral thumb pin sites without infection or vascular compromise. One inpatient represented to the ED within 90 days of surgery for bilateral hand cellulitis.All patients with ASA I classification were performed outpatient. Three of 7 inpatients (43 %) had congenital heart disease versus 5 of the 20 (25 %) outpatients. There was a trend that inpatients were younger than the outpatient cohort (19 vs. 33 months). The average length of procedure in the inpatient cohort was significantly longer than the outpatient cohort (237 vs. 173 min). Pollicizations performed between 2017 and 2022 were more likely to be outpatient than those performed between 2010 and 2016.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>On properly selected patients, outpatient pollicization appears to be a safe option. Patients with longer operative times were more likely to require postoperative hospital admission. Over the study years evaluated at our institution, pollicization procedures were more likely to be performed outpatient, reflecting an evolution of our practice.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, retrospective cohort study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"100176\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11770200/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jham.2024.100176\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jham.2024.100176","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:过渡到门诊手术已经增长的重点是提供安全,高质量的医疗服务。本研究的目的是比较门诊和住院极化手术患者90天急诊科(ED)就诊、再入院和并发症。方法:查询单一机构数据库,查询2010年至2022年18岁以下患者的一次拇指极化情况。收集标准人口统计数据、合并症、手术信息和出院处置。主要结局指标为并发症,包括急诊科就诊、计划外再手术和90天内再入院。结果:27例患者行极化手术。20例患者为门诊手术,7例为术后住院,定义为过夜住院。门诊队列在90天内没有主要的术后并发症,包括没有急诊科就诊、再手术或再入院。一名门诊患者出现双侧拇指针周围肿胀,但无感染或血管受损。一例在手术后90天内因双侧手蜂窝组织炎住院的患者。所有ASA I级患者均为门诊患者。7名住院患者中有3名(43%)患有先天性心脏病,而20名门诊患者中有5名(25%)患有先天性心脏病。住院患者比门诊患者年龄更小(19个月对33个月)。住院队列的平均手术时间明显长于门诊队列(237分钟对173分钟)。2017年至2022年期间进行的极化比2010年至2016年期间进行的极化更有可能是门诊。结论:在适当选择的患者,门诊政治化似乎是一个安全的选择。手术时间较长的患者更有可能需要术后住院。在我们机构评估的研究期间,政治化程序更有可能在门诊进行,这反映了我们实践的演变。证据等级:III级,回顾性队列研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison study of 90-day readmission and emergency department visitation after outpatient versus inpatient pediatric pollicization surgery.

Introduction: Transition to outpatient surgery has grown with an emphasis on delivery of safe, high-quality medical care. The purpose of this study is to compare 90-day emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and complications between patients undergoing outpatient versus inpatient pollicization surgery.

Methods: A single institution database was queried for primary thumb pollicization from 2010 to 2022 in patients under 18 years of age. Standard demographic data, comorbidities, surgical information, and discharge disposition were collected. Primary outcome measures were complications including ED visits, unplanned reoperations and hospital readmissions within 90-days of index procedure.

Results: Twenty-seven patients underwent pollicization surgery. Twenty patients were outpatient surgery while 7 had postoperative hospital admission, defined as an overnight hospital stay. The outpatient cohort had no major postoperative complications including no ED visits, reoperations or readmissions within 90 days of index procedure. One outpatient experienced swelling around bilateral thumb pin sites without infection or vascular compromise. One inpatient represented to the ED within 90 days of surgery for bilateral hand cellulitis.All patients with ASA I classification were performed outpatient. Three of 7 inpatients (43 %) had congenital heart disease versus 5 of the 20 (25 %) outpatients. There was a trend that inpatients were younger than the outpatient cohort (19 vs. 33 months). The average length of procedure in the inpatient cohort was significantly longer than the outpatient cohort (237 vs. 173 min). Pollicizations performed between 2017 and 2022 were more likely to be outpatient than those performed between 2010 and 2016.

Conclusion: On properly selected patients, outpatient pollicization appears to be a safe option. Patients with longer operative times were more likely to require postoperative hospital admission. Over the study years evaluated at our institution, pollicization procedures were more likely to be performed outpatient, reflecting an evolution of our practice.

Level of evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
39
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信