Impact of Frailty on Early Readmissions of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in the United States: Where Do We Stand?

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of Clinical Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.3390/jcm13206236
Bhanu Siva Mohan Pinnam, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Saurabh Chandan, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Hassam Ali, Sahib Singh, Umar Hayat, Amna Iqbal, Saqr Alsakarneh, Fouad Jaber, Islam Mohamed, Amir Humza Sohail, Neil Sharma
{"title":"Impact of Frailty on Early Readmissions of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in the United States: Where Do We Stand?","authors":"Bhanu Siva Mohan Pinnam, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Saurabh Chandan, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Hassam Ali, Sahib Singh, Umar Hayat, Amna Iqbal, Saqr Alsakarneh, Fouad Jaber, Islam Mohamed, Amir Humza Sohail, Neil Sharma","doi":"10.3390/jcm13206236","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> We assessed the impact of frailty on outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the United States. <b>Methods:</b> The National Readmission Database (2016-2020) was used to identify index and 30-day ERCP readmissions, which were categorized into low-frailty, intermediate-frailty, and high-frailty groups based on the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS). Outcomes were then compared. <b>Results:</b> Of 885,416 index admissions, 9.9% were readmitted within 30 days of ERCP. The odds of 30-day readmission were higher in the intermediate-frailty group (12.59% vs. 8.2%, odds ratio [OR] 1.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64-1.71, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and the high-frailty group (10.57% vs. 8.2%, OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.52-1.73, <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared to the low-frailty group. On readmission, a higher HFRS also increased mean length of stay (intermediate-frailty vs. low-frailty: 8.49 vs. 4.22 days, mean difference (MD) 4.26, 95% CI 4.19-4.34, <i>p</i> < 0.001; high-frailty vs. low-frailty: 10.9 vs. 4.22 days, MD 10.9 days, 95% CI 10.52-11.28, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and mean total hospitalization charges (intermediate-frailty vs. low-frailty: $118,996 vs. $68,034, MD $50,962, 95% CI 48, 854-53,069, <i>p</i> < 0.001; high-frailty vs. low-frailty: $195,584 vs. $68,034, MD $127,550, 95% CI 120,581-134,519, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The odds of inpatient mortality were also higher for the intermediate-frailty and high-frailty compared to the low-frailty subgroup. <b>Conclusions:</b> Frailty was associated with worse clinical outcomes after ERCP.</p>","PeriodicalId":15533,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11508531/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13206236","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: We assessed the impact of frailty on outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the United States. Methods: The National Readmission Database (2016-2020) was used to identify index and 30-day ERCP readmissions, which were categorized into low-frailty, intermediate-frailty, and high-frailty groups based on the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS). Outcomes were then compared. Results: Of 885,416 index admissions, 9.9% were readmitted within 30 days of ERCP. The odds of 30-day readmission were higher in the intermediate-frailty group (12.59% vs. 8.2%, odds ratio [OR] 1.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64-1.71, p < 0.001) and the high-frailty group (10.57% vs. 8.2%, OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.52-1.73, p < 0.001) compared to the low-frailty group. On readmission, a higher HFRS also increased mean length of stay (intermediate-frailty vs. low-frailty: 8.49 vs. 4.22 days, mean difference (MD) 4.26, 95% CI 4.19-4.34, p < 0.001; high-frailty vs. low-frailty: 10.9 vs. 4.22 days, MD 10.9 days, 95% CI 10.52-11.28, p < 0.001) and mean total hospitalization charges (intermediate-frailty vs. low-frailty: $118,996 vs. $68,034, MD $50,962, 95% CI 48, 854-53,069, p < 0.001; high-frailty vs. low-frailty: $195,584 vs. $68,034, MD $127,550, 95% CI 120,581-134,519, p < 0.001). The odds of inpatient mortality were also higher for the intermediate-frailty and high-frailty compared to the low-frailty subgroup. Conclusions: Frailty was associated with worse clinical outcomes after ERCP.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
体弱对美国内镜逆行胰胆管造影术早期再入院的影响:我们的现状如何?
背景/目的:我们评估了虚弱对美国内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)疗效的影响。方法:采用国家再入院数据库(2016-2020 年):根据医院虚弱风险评分(HFRS)将其分为低虚弱组、中虚弱组和高虚弱组。然后对结果进行比较。结果:在 885,416 例入院指标中,9.9% 的患者在 ERCP 术后 30 天内再次入院。与低度虚弱组相比,中度虚弱组(12.59% 对 8.2%,比值比 [OR] 1.67,95% 置信区间 [CI] 1.64-1.71,p < 0.001)和高度虚弱组(10.57% 对 8.2%,比值比 1.62,95% 置信区间 1.52-1.73,p < 0.001)30 天内再次入院的几率更高。再入院时,较高的 HFRS 也会增加平均住院时间(中度虚弱组 vs. 低度虚弱组:8.49 天 vs. 4.22 天,平均差 (MD) 4.26,95% CI 4.19-4.34,P <0.001;高度虚弱组 vs. 低度虚弱组:10.9 天 vs. 4.22 天,MD 10.9 天,95% CI 10.52-11.28, p < 0.001)和平均住院总费用(中度虚弱 vs. 低度虚弱:118,996 美元 vs. 68,034 美元,MD 50,962 美元,95% CI 48,854-53,069, p < 0.001;高度虚弱 vs. 低度虚弱:195,584 美元 vs. 68,034 美元,MD 127,550 美元,95% CI 120,581-134,519, p < 0.001)。与低度虚弱亚组相比,中度虚弱和高度虚弱亚组的住院患者死亡几率也更高。结论体弱与ERCP术后较差的临床预后有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Journal of Clinical Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
6468
审稿时长
16.32 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383), is an international scientific open access journal, providing a platform for advances in health care/clinical practices, the study of direct observation of patients and general medical research. This multi-disciplinary journal is aimed at a wide audience of medical researchers and healthcare professionals. Unique features of this journal: manuscripts regarding original research and ideas will be particularly welcomed.JCM also accepts reviews, communications, and short notes. There is no limit to publication length: our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible.
期刊最新文献
Comparative Efficacy of Classic Versus Horizontal Incision Techniques in Skin-Reducing Mastectomy: A Single Center Retrospective Analysis. Adherence to Exercise in People with Lung or Head and Neck Cancer: Self-Reported Symptoms and Motivation During Cancer Treatment Need to Be Considered. Analyzing the Impact of Rehabilitation Utilizing Neurofunctional Exercises on the Functional Status of Stroke Patients. Approaches to Deprescribing Proton Pump Inhibitors in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review. Allograft Prosthetic Composite (APC) for Proximal Humeral Bone Deficiency in Revision Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Technical Note and Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1