Literature DB >> 29712995

Postoperative Rehabilitation May Reduce the Risk of Readmission After Groin Hernia Repair.

Grégoire Mercier1, Jessica Spence2, Christelle Ferreira3, Jean-Marc Delay4, Charles Meunier3, Bertrand Millat5, Tri-Long Nguyen6,7, Fabienne Seguret8.   

Abstract

Thirty-day readmission after surgery has been proposed as a quality-of-care indicator. We explored the effect of postoperative rehabilitation on readmission risk after groin hernia repair. We used the French National Discharge Database to identify all index hospitalizations for groin hernia repair in 2011. Readmissions within 30 days of discharge were clinically classified in terms of their relationship to the index stay. We used logistic regression to adjust the risk of readmission for patient, procedure and hospital factors. Among 122,952 index hospitalizations for inguinal hernia repair, 3,357 (2.7%) related 30-day readmissions were recorded. Reiterated analyses indicated that readmission risk was consistently associated with patient complexity: age (per year after 60 years, OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.03, P < 0.001), hospitalization within the previous year (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.44-1.69, P < 0.001), and increasing severity and combination of co-morbidities. Postoperative rehabilitation was identified as a protective factor (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.46-0.69, P < 0.001). Older patients and those with greater comorbidity are at elevated risk of readmission after inguinal hernia repair. Postoperative rehabilitation may reduce this risk. Further studies are warranted to confirm the protective effect of postoperative rehabilitation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29712995      PMCID: PMC5928219          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-25276-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Introduction

Inguinal and femoral (groin) hernia repairs are two of the most common general surgical interventions, with more than 770,000 procedures being performed each year in the United States (US)[1] and 160,000 in France[2]. These operations are typically performed as outpatient or short-stay procedures, with most admissions lasting no more than 1–2 days[3,4]. However, as many as 5–6% of patients may be readmitted in the 30 days after discharge from hospital[4,5]. Because of the associated health and financial implications, 30-day readmission has been proposed as a quality of care indicator[6]. Since the implementation of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program in the US[7], numerous studies focusing on predicting and preventing thirty-day readmission have been published. Given that age and number of comorbidities[8-11] have been repeatedly identified as predictors and that studies evaluating the impact of changes to surgical[12-16] and anaesthetic[14,17] technique have been inconclusive, several researchers have questioned whether readmission is even preventable[18]. Given this possibility, there has been a recent interest in the role of postoperative strategies to prevent readmission[11,19-27], including inpatient rehabilitation, home healthcare, long-term hospital stays, and discharge to a skilled nursing facility[21]. On one hand, it has been suggested that maintenance of care after surgery might reduce risk of readmission[19,24,25]. On the other hand, discharge to a post-acute care facility was an independent predictor of readmission after surgery[22,23,26,27]. Inpatient rehabilitation constitutes one of the only active interventions, as opposed to simply providing prolonged institutional care. We sought to explore the effect of inpatient rehabilitation on readmission after primary groin hernia repair.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the French National Discharge Database. This exhaustive database contains public and private hospital discharge records, including diagnosis, treatment and demographic information. Since its inception on January 1st, 2004, this database has incorporated almost 24 million new records annually with a current total of more than 190 million entries. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The study protocol was approved by the French institutional committee National Commission for Information Technology and Civil Liberties (Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés). According to French law, informed consent is not required for retrospective analyses of discharge databases. We included all patients aged 18 years or older who underwent a primary groin hernia repair between January 1st and December 31st of 2011. The records associated with an inguinal/femoral hernia surgery code (French Common Classification of Medical Procedures, CCAM[28], 23th version) were identified. Second, we selected patients with a primary diagnosis of inguinal/femoral hernia-associated symptoms (i.e., vomiting, nausea, bloating and constipation) (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision[29], ICD-10 codes K40–46, K55, K56 K63, K65, K66, and R10, R11). We included only records within groin hernia repair diagnosis-related groups (DRGs, version 12. 11b)[30]. Finally, because hernia recurrence has been described to increase the risk of adverse postoperative outcomes[14,31], we restricted our selection to cases defined as incidents by excluding patients with previous diagnoses of groin hernia between 2004 and 2011. We used anonymized patient identifiers to process the data and to eliminate record duplications. We defined the primary outcome as the occurrence of 30-day readmission related to the index stay. As the worst possible outcome, we also included death prior to initial hospital discharge in our primary endpoint. To evaluate whether readmission was related to index stay, a digestive surgeon (hernia surgery is performed by digestive surgeons in France) and an anaesthesiologist independently reviewed all 30-day readmissions based on a method similar to a previously described one[32]. Considering the discharge-to-readmission time, age and principal diagnosis, readmissions were classified into 4 groups: “probably related to the primary surgery (local complication)”, “probably related to the primary surgery (general complication)”, “potentially related to the primary surgery”, or “probably not related to the primary surgery.” This last group was excluded from the primary analysis. Inter-rater agreement was evaluated using Cohen’s kappa coefficient. To evaluate the effect of postoperative rehabilitation on readmission to the hospital, we adjusted for several patient-, procedure-, and hospital-related variables. Since a spline regression suggested that age had virtually no effect on the readmission risk below 60, we included age as a continuous variable above 60 years. Because we hypothesized that readmission risk could be explained by the combination of multiple pathologies, we created a discrete co-morbidity variable. In doing so, we first conducted a data mining algorithm to generate association rules[33], which allowed us to identify certain combinations of diseases[34] associated with readmission. Co-morbidities were included in the model according to their diagnostic pool, as defined in the ICD-10. Severity was categorized in five groups according to the DRG-grouping function[30]: from J (same-day surgery) to 1, 2, 3 and 4 (inpatient surgery of increasing risk). The surgical technique (laparoscopic or open repair; use of mesh or no), anatomic localization of the hernia (femoral or inguinal; unilateral or bilateral), diagnosis of hernia complications (obstruction and infection), hospitalization during the previous year, concomitant surgery, emergency admission and patient transfer were introduced as binary variables. The length of stay, driving time to hospital, hospital surgical volume (percentage of surgical stays among all hospital stays per year) and hospital activity range (number of different DRGs per year) were categorized into quartiles. The total number of stays per year for each hospital was logarithmically transformed and introduced as a continuous variable. We compared the medians of continuous variables using the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test and proportions using the χ2 test for all categorical variables. Variables with p < 0.25 in univariate analyses were selected for inclusion in our multivariate model using stepwise selection (criterion alpha = 0.05). Variables meeting our criterion alpha were included in the final multivariate logistic regression model. The association of covariates with readmission after surgery was described using the odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Adjusted effects with P < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Given that there is a risk of selecting spurious variables when model selection is used in large datasets, we evaluated the robustness of our results by reiterating stepwise selection on random subsamples of varying size[35,36], with 100 iterations conducted at each step. The analyses were carried out with SAS Enterprise Guide 4.3 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) and R 2.15.2 (R Development Core Team. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from Fédération Hospitalière de France, but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. However, the data are available from the authors upon reasonable request and with the permission of Fédération Hospitalière de France.

Results

A total of 122,952 patients underwent a primary groin hernia repair (Fig. 1). The median age was 61 years, and 106,925 (87.0%) were males; 4,694 admissions (3.8%) were emergency hospitalizations, and 527 (0.5%) were transfers from care units. Most procedures were open techniques (81,288, 66.9%) and used mesh (110,117, 89.6%). Only 48,352 (39.3%) procedures were same-day surgeries.
Figure 1

Admissions flow chart.

Admissions flow chart. In our database, 4,409 patients (3.6%) were re-hospitalized within 30 days after hernia surgery, and 226 (0.2%) died in the hospital. As shown in Fig. 1, 3,357/4,635 events were probably or potentially related to the index hospitalization (inter-rater Cohen’s kappa coefficient = 0.845, 95% CI 0.827–0.863). The median interval between discharge and readmission was 8 days. The most common reasons for readmission were post-procedural complications (haemorrhage/haematoma and digestive disorders) (7.0%), acute abdominal and pelvic pain (5.4%), and retention of urine and haematuria (4.9%) (Table 1).
Table 1

Description of the primary composite outcome of death or 30-day readmission related to the index stay (with top five most frequent reasons).

n (%)ICD-codes
In - hospital deaths during the index stay 226 (6.7)
Readmissions probably related to the index stay (complications in the operative field occurring within 7 days)1,355 (40.4)
Post procedural complications: haemorrhage/haematoma, digestive disorders235 (7.0)T81, K91
Acute abdominal and pelvic pain181 (5.4)R10
Constipation, obstruction and paralytic ileus113 (3.4)K56, K59
Retention of urine, haematuria164 (4.9)R31, R33
Cutaneous abscess, furuncle and carbuncle92 (2.7)L02
Readmissions probably related to the index stay (general complications occurring within 7 days)512 (15.2)
Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical findings: ascites, respiratory disorders, disturbance of skin sensation, symptoms of systemic inflammation and infection, fever, malaise and fatigue, syncope and collapse, shock137 (4.1)R06, R07, R18, R20, R50, R53, R55, R57, R65
Phlebitis and thrombophlebitis, pulmonary embolism, arterial embolism and thrombosis, ischaemic stroke, ischaemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation and flutter, heart failure, acute kidney failure114 (3.4)I20, I21, I26, I48, I50, I63, I64, I74, I80, N17
Cystitis and other genitourinary disorders80 (2.4)N17, N30, N39, N40, N47
Pneumonia and other respiratory diseases31 (0.9)J15, J18, J44, J98
Gastric ulcer, acute appendicitis, and other digestive diseases13 (0.4)K25, K35, K92
Readmissions possibly related to the index stay (complications occurring after 7 days)1,264 (37.7)
Superficial injury of the abdomen, lower back, pelvis or external genitals168 (5.0)S30
Hypertension, ischaemic stroke, ischaemic heart disease, cardiomyopathy, cardiac dysrhythmia, heart failure165 (4.9)I10, I20, I21, I25, I42, I44, I47, I48, I50, I63, I70
Inguinal hernia, ventral hernia, gastritis and duodenitis, cholelithiasis, and other digestive diseases147 (4.4)K29, K40, K43, K80, K92
Cutaneous abscess, furuncle and carbuncle107 (3.2)L02
Return hospital visit for follow-up examination, aftercare adjustment and management127 (3.8)Z04, Z09, Z45, Z46, Z51, Z71
Other readmissions (not considered as outcomes)1,278
Description of the primary composite outcome of death or 30-day readmission related to the index stay (with top five most frequent reasons). Only 1,787 patients (1.4%) received postoperative rehabilitation. Of these, 9.2% were readmitted within 30 days, compared with 2.6% of those not discharged to a rehabilitation unit (unadjusted P < 0.001). To explain the readmission risk, all covariates were introduced into a multivariate logistic regression, except the uni- or bi-laterality of the repair and driving time to hospital (P = 0.628 and P = 0.679 in univariate analysis). After adjustment, postoperative rehabilitation was significantly associated with readmission risk reduction, OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.46–0.69, P < 0.001). Sixteen patient-related, institutional and admission factors were also significantly associated with readmission risk. Age greater than 60, increasing number of co-morbidities combinations, severity, hospitalization during the previous year, pre- or postoperative admission to an intensive care or step down unit, emergency admission, admission by transfer from another inpatient facility, preoperative complicated groin hernia (i.e., hernia strangulation, with or without infection), concomitant surgical procedure and discharge to other acute care facilities were all associated with increased odds of readmission. Female sex, mesh repair, laparoscopic technique and higher hospital surgery volume were all associated with lower odds of readmission. The odds ratios are reported in Table 2. The model yielded satisfactory fit measures (c-statistic: 0.725, Hosmer-Lemeshow test P = 0.488). All-cause readmission analysis (not reported) generated similar results but with lower discriminative performance (c-statistic: 0.698).
Table 2

Adjusted effects on readmission risk.

n (%)Odds ratio (95% CI) P
AgeYear over 6063,056 (51.3)1.03 (1.02, 1.03)<0.001
SexFemale16,027 (13.0)0.89 (0.80, 0.98)0.021
Co-morbidities*Class 075,185 (61.1)1.00
Class 125,652 (20.9)1.17 (1.06, 1.29)0.002
Class 2327 (0.3)1.20 (0.65, 2.22)0.565
Class 312,064 (9.8)1.38 (1.23, 1.55)<0.001
Class 45,514 (4.5)1.62 (1.41, 1.87)<0.001
Class 52,615 (2.1)2.51 (2.13, 2.97)<0.001
Class 6398 (0.3)3.51 (2.58, 4.76)<0.001
Class 7691 (0.6)3.06 (2.40, 3.89)<0.001
Class 8506 (0.4)4.32 (3.34, 5.59)<0.001
1-year prior hospitalizationYes19,071 (15.5)1.56 (1.44, 1.69)<0.001
Complicated hernia diagnosisYes5,936 (4.8)1.20 (1.03, 1.39)0.018
Severity levelSame-day surgery48,346 (39.3)0.78 (0.71, 0.86)<0.001
1 (low)61,688 (50.2)1.00
29,828 (8.0)1.36 (1.21, 1.52)<0.001
32,465 (2.0)1.48 (1.25, 1.75)<0.001
4 (high)625 (0.5)1.88 (1.46, 2.42)<0.001
Emergency entranceYes4,694 (3.8)1.28 (1.10, 1.49)0.002
Transfer at entranceYes447 (0.4)1.50 (1.11, 2.02)0.008
Surgery techniqueLaparoscopy41,664 (33.9)0.83 (0.76, 0.91)<0.001
Mesh repairYes110,117 (89.6)0.88 (0.79, 0.98)0.017
Concomitant procedureYes30,873 (25.1)1.28 (1.18, 1.40)<0.001
Intensive care unit≥1 day181 (0.1)2.60 (1.82, 3.70)<0.001
Step down unit≥1 day560 (0.5)1.51 (1.19, 1.91)0.001
Transfer to acute careYes592 (0.5)3.95 (3.16, 4.94)<0.001
Post-acute rehabilitationYes1,787 (1.5)0.56 (0.46, 0.69)<0.001
Hospital surgery volume1st quartile (≤25%)30,092 (24.5)1.00
2nd quartile (26–30%)28,638 (23.3)0.93 (0.85, 1.02)0.128
3rd quartile (31–45%)32,116 (26.1)0.81 (0.73, 0.90)<0.001
4th quartile (>45%)32,106 (26.1)0.79 (0.70, 0.90)<0.001
Hospital activities diversity1st quartile (≤300 DRG/year)32,408 (26.4)1.00
2nd quartile (301–400)44,596 (36.3)1.05 (0.94, 1.18)0.374
3rd quartile (401–500)28,817 (23.4)1.10 (0.96, 1.25)0.169
4th quartile (>500)17,131 (13.9)1.25 (1.08, 1.44)0.002

†DRG, diagnosis-related groups.

*Co-morbidity classes: (0) no condition; (1) other conditions; (2) infectious and parasitic diseases; (3) diseases of the digestive, respiratory, genitourinary, or nervous system, or injury, poisoning or certain other consequences of external causes; (4) any combinations between diseases of the digestive, respiratory, genitourinary, or circulatory system, or endocrine, nutritional or metabolic diseases, or congenital malformations, deformations or chromosomal abnormalities, or injury, poisoning or certain other consequences of external causes; (5) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified with any other diseases; (6) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings not elsewhere classified with diseases of the genitourinary system; (7) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings not elsewhere classified with diseases of the digestive system; (8) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings not elsewhere classified with diseases of the respiratory system.

Adjusted effects on readmission risk. †DRG, diagnosis-related groups. *Co-morbidity classes: (0) no condition; (1) other conditions; (2) infectious and parasitic diseases; (3) diseases of the digestive, respiratory, genitourinary, or nervous system, or injury, poisoning or certain other consequences of external causes; (4) any combinations between diseases of the digestive, respiratory, genitourinary, or circulatory system, or endocrine, nutritional or metabolic diseases, or congenital malformations, deformations or chromosomal abnormalities, or injury, poisoning or certain other consequences of external causes; (5) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified with any other diseases; (6) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings not elsewhere classified with diseases of the genitourinary system; (7) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings not elsewhere classified with diseases of the digestive system; (8) any combinations of symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings not elsewhere classified with diseases of the respiratory system. We conducted a sensitivity analysis by reiterating model selection on random subsamples of varying size. The protective effect of post-acute rehabilitation was robust against random fluctuations and size variation (Fig. 2), with a consistent statistical significance (achieved in 100% of samples with N = 120,000). Factors related to patient complexity (age, previous hospitalization in the preceding 12 months, co-morbidities and severity) and laparoscopy also showed consistent effects on readmission (>80% of samples with N = 120,000).
Figure 2

Sensitivity analysis for re-estimating the effect of rehabilitation on 30-day readmission in random subsamples of varying size.

Sensitivity analysis for re-estimating the effect of rehabilitation on 30-day readmission in random subsamples of varying size.

Discussion

Our study showed a low rate of 30-day readmission after groin hernia repair, which was lower than the rates reported in previous studies[4,5]. As expected, the readmission risk was mostly explained by patient-related factors[37], and as in previous studies[8,10,11], increasing age, co-morbidity and history of hospitalization in the last 12 months were associated with higher readmission risks. The 30-day readmission risk gradually increased in the presence of multiple co-morbidities, particularly when several common chronic diseases were associated (e.g., hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidaemia, COPD). Also, emergency repair remained associated with higher risk of adverse postoperative outcomes, including both readmission and death[10,14,38]. In keeping with previous work, our study indicated that the use of mesh and laparoscopic techniques were protective factors[31]. In terms of structural variables, readmission risk was reduced when surgery occurred in hospitals with high surgery volumes, while the number of stays per year seemed to have no effect, similar to what has been previously reported in the literature for major surgery[23]. In our study, same-day surgery was relatively uncommon, which may be due to both differences in definition and a late implementation of this practice in France compared to North American and other European countries[39]. We paradoxically found a protective effect for readmission that may be explained by the use of same-day surgery being reserved for healthier patients[32]. To prevent spurious associations related to the large size of our cohort, we repeated our analyses on random subsamples of varying size. As expected, factors related to patient complexity (i.e., age, hospitalization in the preceding 12 months, co-morbidities and severity) were consistently significant and related to both readmission and adverse perioperative outcome, including death. Given this finding, consideration should be given to re-evaluating the indications for elective hernia repair, particularly in elderly and multi-morbid patients. For an asymptomatic hernia, a wait-and-see policy may merit consideration[40]. In situations where emergency surgery is required, anticipating postoperative interventions to mitigate readmission may be beneficial. Further studies investigating the impact of personalized rehabilitation programmes on readmission for comorbid patients would be of high interest. Recent studies have emphasized the importance of post-acute care after surgery[11,19-27], which we found may prevent short-term readmission. Our findings contradict previous studies showing an elevated risk of readmission in patients discharged to poste-acute care facilities after surgery[22,23,26,27]. These studies evaluated discharge to any post-acute care facility, without accounting for whether they were institutional or rehabilitative placements. Nonetheless, given that the readmission rate after groin hernia repair is low, the absolute risk reduction attributable to postoperative rehabilitation may be limited. Further studies are needed to evaluate its effect, specifically in high-risk patients and to identify which patients will benefit the most from these transitional interventions[20]. Similarly, interventions such as pre-habilitation might reduce the readmission risk in digestive surgery[41,42]. Pre-habilitation was not implemented in France until 2011, and further studies on this specific topic might be useful. Our study has several limitations. Several potential predictors of readmission were not available in our database, including American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) class[9], anaesthesia modality[14,17], use of anticoagulant medication[43] and functional and social variables[20]. Our adjustment may also have been limited by the absence of randomization, which would not consider selection bias (e.g., the protective role of laparoscopy), and by the underreporting of co-morbidities, which is a recognized shortcoming in our dataset. Given the non-randomized design, the protective effect of rehabilitation needs to be confirmed in either experimental or observational studies that use methods for reducing model dependence[44]. Since this study explores the effect of numerous variables on the outcome, we chose to perform a regression adjustment, instead of nonparametric matching methods, which allows the causal effect of one variable at a time to be estimated. Being therefore exposed to model-dependence and model-extrapolation issues, the protective effect of rehabilitation must be confirmed in further studies. As some variables related to both the outcome and the rehabilitation status were missing from our database (e.g., social variables), we did not perform a propensity score analysis. The rate of day-case surgery was lower in this study than it is now in most health systems. However, this does not threaten the overall validity of the results because the current evidence comparing same-day versus overnight stay surgery for digestive surgery (including hernia repair) suggests no difference in terms of readmission rate[45]. Finally, the 30-day threshold for readmission is debatable as an outcome of importance, given that adverse postoperative outcomes after hernia repair tend to occur beyond this time period[31]. Our qualitative evaluation of the link between readmission and the index surgery was important for reducing this potential bias[18,32,46]. Despite these identified limitations, our study has several strengths. We obtained good inter-rater reliability in determining the relationship between the index procedure and the need for readmission. Second, we used a unique approach for considering the role of comorbidities, which hypothesized that readmission risk could not only be affected by the presence of certain conditions but also their combination. Although we were not able to validate them, we used comorbidity combinations based on association rules instead of the indices described by Charlson[47] and Elixhauser[48]. Indeed, the latter were developed to predict mortality, and attribute less weight to digestive diseases, compared to cardiac and vascular diseases. In addition, recent studies suggest that using them for nonfatal outcomes is flawed[49,50]. Third, our model had satisfactory goodness of fit, in spite of the acknowledged limitations of using administrative datasets for the development of models[10]. Administrative datasets also have strengths, in that they constitute a valid and low-cost source of clinical information[51-53]. We used an extremely large and exhaustive national database, limiting selection bias. However, an issue related to using such a large database is that statistically significant results that have little or no clinical significance may be identified[23,36]. To mitigate this, we reiterated our analysis on random subsamples to clearly distinguish real from spurious associations. The finding that a small number of the seventeen independent factors that were identified in the larger sample remained constant warns against two issues: the statistical instability of stepwise selection[35] and the subsequent clinical consideration of factors that are not truly relevant. Our original approach did not involve only the identification of readmission factors but also the assessment of their pertinence. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to highlight a protective effect of post-surgical rehabilitation on 30-day readmission after inguinal and femoral hernia repairs, the two most common surgical interventions. These findings, which may lead to improvements in postoperative care, need to be confirmed in future studies.

Conclusions

Our study shows that readmission after groin hernia repair is largely explained by patient complexity but may be prevented by post-acute rehabilitation. Further study is required to confirm our results and to develop individual risk prediction tools that could allow clinicians to detect higher risk patients to whom such postoperative interventions should be applied.
  46 in total

1.  Risk factors for complications in groin hernia surgery: a national register study.

Authors:  Karl-Johan Lundström; Gabriel Sandblom; Sam Smedberg; Pär Nordin
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  A meta-analysis of surgical morbidity and recurrence after laparoscopic and open repair of primary unilateral inguinal hernia.

Authors:  Elma A O'Reilly; John P Burke; P Ronan O'Connell
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Geriatric Rehabilitation and Discharge Location After Hip Fracture in Relation to the Risks of Death and Readmission.

Authors:  Peter Nordström; Karl Michaëlsson; Ami Hommel; Per Ola Norrman; Karl-Göran Thorngren; Anna Nordström
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 4.669

4.  Risk factors for 30-day readmission in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair.

Authors:  Francis Lovecchio; Rebecca Farmer; Jason Souza; Nima Khavanin; Gregory A Dumanian; John Y S Kim
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2013-12-25       Impact factor: 3.982

5.  Evaluation of hospital readmissions in surgical patients: do administrative data tell the real story?

Authors:  Greg D Sacks; Aaron J Dawes; Marcia M Russell; Anne Y Lin; Melinda Maggard-Gibbons; Deborah Winograd; Hallie R Chung; James Tomlinson; Areti Tillou; Stephen B Shew; Darryl T Hiyama; H Gill Cryer; F Charles Brunicardi; Jonathan R Hiatt; Clifford Ko
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 14.766

6.  Observation or operation for patients with an asymptomatic inguinal hernia: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Patrick J O'Dwyer; John Norrie; Ahmed Alani; Andrew Walker; Felix Duffy; Paul Horgan
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Automated variable selection methods for logistic regression produced unstable models for predicting acute myocardial infarction mortality.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Jack V Tu
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  Assessment of 126,913 inguinal hernia repairs in the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy: analysis of 10 years.

Authors:  L Ansaloni; F Coccolini; D Fortuna; F Catena; S Di Saverio; L M B Belotti; R M Melotti
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 4.739

9.  Use of administrative data or clinical databases as predictors of risk of death in hospital: comparison of models.

Authors:  Paul Aylin; Alex Bottle; Azeem Majeed
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-04-23

Review 10.  Open mesh versus non-mesh for repair of femoral and inguinal hernia.

Authors:  N W Scott; K McCormack; P Graham; P M Go; S J Ross; A M Grant
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2002
View more
  1 in total

1.  Acceptability and barriers to adopting physical therapy and rehabilitation as standard of care in hernia disease: a prospective national survey of providers and preliminary data.

Authors:  S Renshaw; R Peterson; R Lewis; M Olson; W Henderson; B Kreuz; B Poulose; R M Higgins
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2022-04-10       Impact factor: 2.920

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.