Cargando…
Examining readmissions following outpatient microlaryngeal surgery
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine readmissions following microlaryngeal surgery. It was hypothesized that airway surgical procedures would have higher rates of readmission. DESIGN: Retrospective review. METHODS: Outpatient microlaryngeal surgeries from May 1, 2018 to November 27,...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10446258/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37621263 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lio2.1101 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine readmissions following microlaryngeal surgery. It was hypothesized that airway surgical procedures would have higher rates of readmission. DESIGN: Retrospective review. METHODS: Outpatient microlaryngeal surgeries from May 1, 2018 to November 27, 2022 were reviewed. Readmissions related to the original surgery within a 30‐day postoperative period were examined. Patient demographics, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologist class, comorbidities, type of surgery, ventilation techniques, and operative times were examined and compared. RESULTS: Out of 480 procedures analyzed, 19 (4.0%) resulted in a readmission, 9 (1.9%) of which were for glottic stenosis management. Undergoing an airway procedure was significantly associated with a readmission (p = .002) and increased the odds of readmission by 5.99 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.22–16.16, p < .001). Current/former smoking status increased the odds of readmission by 4.50 (95% CI: 1.33–15.19, p = .016). Each additional minute of operating time increased the odds of readmission by 1.03 (95% CI: 1.00–1.05, p = .04). CONCLUSION: Readmissions from microlaryngeal surgery are seldom reported but nonetheless occur. Identifying factors that may place a procedure at risk for readmission can help improve surgical quality of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. |
---|