↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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, Gavin Miyasato, Sangtaeck Lim, Jerome Riebman, Richard Kocharian, Jillian Scaife, Mitra Corral, Lisa M Meckley, Yajing Rao

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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 30%
Student > Bachelor 4 20%
Other 4 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 2 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 15%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 2 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 November 2015.
All research outputs
#2,720,347
of 6,577,121 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#107
of 235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,089
of 211,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,577,121 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 56th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 235 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 211,921 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.