Outcomes variability in non-emergent esophageal foreign body removal: Is daytime removal better?

被引:5
|
作者
Huang, Zhen J. [1 ]
Guffey, Danielle [2 ]
Minard, Charles G. [2 ]
Friedman, Ellen M. [3 ]
机构
[1] Baylor Coll Med, Bobby R Alford Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Baylor Coll Med, Dan L Duncan Inst Clin & Translat Res, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[3] Baylor Coll Med, Ctr Professionalism Med, Houston, TX 77030 USA
关键词
Esophageal foreign body; Cost; Outcome; After-hours; INTENSIVE-CARE; OPERATIONS; MORTALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijporl.2015.06.027
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
Objective: The objective of this study is to investigate differences between esophageal foreign body removal performed during standard operating room hours and those performed after-hours in asymptomatic patients. Methods: A retrospective chart review at a tertiary children's hospital identified 264 cases of patients with non-emergent esophageal foreign bodies between 2006 and 2011. Variables pertaining to procedure and recovery times, hospital charges, complications, length of stay, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification, and presence of mucosal injury were summarized and compared between cases performed during standard operating hours and those performed after-hours. Results: Cases performed during standard hours had significantly longer average wait times compared with after-hours cases (13.1 h versus 9.0 h, p < 0.001). No other clinical characteristics or outcomes were significantly different between groups. Longer wait times are not associated with mucosal injury or postoperative complications. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in procedure time, charges, or safety in after-hours removal of non-emergent esophageal foreign bodies compared to removal during standard operating hours. OR wait time was about 4 h longer during standard hours compared with after-hours. This study could not assess the factors to determine the impact in differences in hospital resource utilization or work force, which may be significant between these two groups. (C) 2015 Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1630 / 1633
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Differences in Outcomes between Patellar Dislocations Managed in Emergent versus Non-Emergent Care Settings
    Cook, Chad E.
    Saad, Mohammad
    Tucker, Christopher J.
    Min, Kyong S.
    Westrick, Richard B.
    Rhon, Daniel, I
    JOURNAL OF KNEE SURGERY, 2022, 35 (10) : 1056 - 1062
  • [32] ENDOSCOPIC REMOVAL OF ESOPHAGEAL FOREIGN-BODIES
    GUITRON, A
    ADALID, R
    NOYOLA, SG
    VIAL, G
    HERRERA, L
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1990, 36 (02) : 192 - 192
  • [33] Esophageal foreign bodies: Types and techniques for removal
    Smith M.T.
    Wong R.K.H.
    Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology, 2006, 9 (1) : 75 - 84
  • [34] REMOVAL OF ESOPHAGEAL FOREIGN BODIES BY THE EXTERNAL APPROACH
    SANDERSON, BA
    ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 1957, 66 (03): : 305 - 306
  • [35] REMOVAL OF FOREIGN BODY FROM NOSE
    MCMASTER, WC
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1970, 213 (11): : 1905 - &
  • [36] Foreign Body Removal: A Shocking Story
    Cheek, Susannah
    Shifflette, Vanessa
    Dunn, Ernest
    AMERICAN SURGEON, 2013, 79 (01) : E35 - E36
  • [37] Foreign body removal is getting "cooler"
    Kazachkov, Mikhail
    Vicencio, Alfin
    PEDIATRIC PULMONOLOGY, 2016, 51 (09) : 886 - 888
  • [38] Foreign Body Removal - Relax! Reply
    Murray, David J.
    Krucylak, Catherine
    AuBuchon, Jacob
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2012, 117 (01) : 219 - 219
  • [39] Magnetic removal of a nasal foreign body
    Douglas, SA
    Mirza, S
    Stafford, FW
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2002, 62 (02) : 165 - 167
  • [40] NASAL FOREIGN-BODY REMOVAL
    MEADOFF, TM
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1995, 26 (03) : 390 - 390