↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Variation in hospital resource use and cost among surgical procedures using topical absorbable hemostats

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Variation in hospital resource use and cost among surgical procedures using topical absorbable hemostats
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s88698
Pubmed ID
Authors

Derek Martyn, Lisa M Meckley, Gavin Miyasato, Sangtaeck Lim, Jerome B Riebman, Richard Kocharian, Jillian G Scaife, Yajing Rao, Mitra Corral

Abstract

Adjunctive hemostats are used to assist with the control of intraoperative bleeding. The most common types are flowables, gelatins, thrombins, and oxidized regenerated celluloses (ORCs). In the US, Surgicel(®) products are the only US Food and Drug Administration-approved ORCs. To compare the outcomes of health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with using ORCs compared to other adjunctive hemostats (OAHs are defined as flowables, gelatins, and topical thrombins) for surgical procedures in the US inpatient setting. A retrospective, US-based cohort study was conducted using hospital inpatient discharges from the 2011-2012 calendar years in the Premier Healthcare Database. Patients with either an ORC or an OAH who underwent a cardiovascular procedure (valve surgery and/or coronary artery bypass graft surgery), carotid endarterectomy, cholecystectomy, or hysterectomy were included. Propensity score matching was used to create comparable groups of ORC and OAH patients. Clinical, economic, and HRU outcomes were compared. The propensity score matching created balanced patient cohorts for cardiovascular procedure (22,718 patients), carotid endarterectomy (10,890 patients), cholecystectomy (6,090 patients), and hysterectomy (9,348 patients). In all procedures, hemostatic agent costs were 28%-56% lower for ORCs, and mean hemostat units per discharge were 16%-41% lower for ORCs compared to OAHs. Length of stay and total procedure costs for patients treated with ORCs were lower for carotid endarterectomy patients (0.3 days and US$700) and for cholecystectomy patients (1 day and US$3,350) (all P<0.001). Costs and HRU for patients treated with ORCs were lower than or similar to patients treated with OAHs. Proper selection of the appropriate hemostatic agents has the potential to influence clinical outcomes and treatment costs.

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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 26%
Student > Bachelor 5 19%
Other 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 11%
Unspecified 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 2 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 November 2015.
All research outputs
#20,103,978
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#394
of 524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,464
of 295,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#16
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 295,307 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.