↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Health and economic outcomes associated with uncontrolled surgical bleeding: a retrospective analysis of the Premier Perspectives Database

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 525)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Health and economic outcomes associated with uncontrolled surgical bleeding: a retrospective analysis of the Premier Perspectives Database
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s86369
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mitra Corral, Nicole Ferko, Sarah Hollmann, Michael S Broder, Eunice Chang

Abstract

Bleeding remains a common occurrence in surgery. Data describing the burden of difficult-to-control bleeding and topical absorbable hemostat use are sparse. This study was conducted to estimate the clinical and economic impact that remains associated with uncontrolled surgical bleeding, even when hemostats are used during surgery. This US retrospective analysis used the Premier Perspectives Database. Hospital discharges from 2012 were used to identify patients treated with hemostats during eight surgery types. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years, had an inpatient hospitalization with one of the eight surgeries, and received a hemostat on the day of surgery. Patients were stratified by procedure and presence or absence of major bleeding (uncontrolled) despite hemostat use. Outcomes were all-cause hospitalization costs, hemostat costs, length of stay, reoperation, and surgery-related complications (eg, mortality). Statistical significance was tested through chi-square or t-tests. Multivariate analyses were conducted for all-cause costs and length of stay using analysis of covariance. Among 25,048 procedures, major bleeding events occurred in 14,251 cases. Despite treatment with hemostats, major bleeding occurred in 32%-68% of cases. All-cause costs were significantly higher in patients with uncontrolled bleeding despite hemostat use versus controlled bleeding (US$24,203-$61,323 [uncontrolled], US$14,420-$45,593 [controlled]; P<0.001). Hemostat costs were significantly greater in the uncontrolled bleeding cohort for all surgery types except cystectomy and pancreatic surgery. Reoperation and mortality rates were significantly higher in the uncontrolled bleeding cohort in all surgical procedures except cystectomy and radical hysterectomy. Uncontrolled intraoperative bleeding despite hemostat use is prevalent and associated with significantly higher hospital costs and worse clinical outcomes across several surgical procedures compared to controlled bleeding. There is an unmet need for newer hemostats that can more effectively control bleeding, improve outcomes, and reduce hospital resource use.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 16%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Professor 2 5%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Engineering 2 5%
Materials Science 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 92. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 January 2023.
All research outputs
#461,354
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#15
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,920
of 277,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.