Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ https://ijgc.bmj.com...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2...
Article . 2019 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

447 The impact of patient travel distance on quality indicators in gynecologic surgery

Authors: John Frame; Ginger J. Gardner; Renee A. Cowan; N Zhou; Nadeem R. Abu-Rustum; Dennis S. Chi; Kent A. Sepkowitz; +2 Authors

447 The impact of patient travel distance on quality indicators in gynecologic surgery

Abstract

Objectives To characterize patient travel distance to a comprehensive cancer center (CC) for gynecologic surgery; to determine the impact of travel distance on perioperative quality indicators. Methods Patients who underwent first gynecologic surgery at a CC from 1/2000–3/2018 were identified. Travel distance was defined as ‘‘‘‘‘close’’’’’ (≤50 mi) or ‘‘‘‘‘far’’’’’ (>50 mi). Patient demographics, procedural complexity, rates of reoperation, reporting to improve safety and quality (RISQ) events, and postoperative mortality were identified. Results Of 23,340 patients, 19,246 were included in the close group and 4,094 in the far group. Median distance traveled was 19.25mi (range 0–4963): 14.35mi for close group, 85.21mi far group. Median age was 55 years (range 18–97). There was no difference in age (p=0.87) or ASA status (p=0.16) between groups. Patients in the far group underwent more complex procedures based on RVUs (p=0.00) and case length (p=0.00) and had 1-day longer length of stay (p=0.003). There were more non-White (p=0.00), non-English speaking (p=0.00), and unmarried (p=0.00) patients in the close group. There was no difference in rate of reoperation (p=0.95) or 30-, 60-, or 90-day mortality (p=0.35, 0.80, 0.34) between groups. Patients who traveled farther had 1% more RISQ events (p=0.003), but this did not hold on multivariate analysis. Conclusions We demonstrate that patients who travel for centralized specialty gynecologic surgical care have more complex procedures, more perioperative adverse events, and longer length of stay, without negative impact on perioperative quality of care, reoperation, or postoperative mortality.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
bronze
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research