Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 349

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized clinical trial of comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimization in vascular surgery

Open access
Partridge, J S L, Harari, D, Martin, F C, Peacock, J L, Bell, R, Mohammed, A, Dhesi, J K·2017·British Journal of Surgery

Abstract

Background: Increasing numbers of older patients are undergoing vascular surgery. Inadequate preoperative assessment and optimization may contribute to increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Methods: Patients aged at least 65 years scheduled for elective aortic aneurysm repair or lower-limb arterial surgery were enrolled in an RCT of standard preoperative assessment or preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimization. Randomization was stratified by sex and surgical site (aorta/lower limb). Primary outcome was length of hospital stay. Secondary outcome measures included new medical co-morbidities, postoperative medical or surgical complications, discharge to a higher level of dependency and 30-day readmission rate. Results: A total of 176 patients were included in the final analysis (control 91, intervention 85). Geometric mean length of stay was 5·53 days in the control group and 3·32 days in the intervention group (ratio of geometric means 0·60, 95 per cent c.i. 0·46 to 0·79; P < 0·001). There was a lower incidence of delirium (11 versus 24 per cent; P = 0·018), cardiac complications (8 versus 27 per cent; P = 0·001) and bladder/bowel complications (33 versus 55 per cent; P = 0·003) in the intervention group compared with the control group. Patients in the intervention group were less likely to require discharge to a higher level of dependency (4 of 85 versus 12 of 91; P = 0·051). Conclusion: In this study of patients aged 65 years or older undergoing vascular surgery, preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay. Patients undergoing assessment and optimization had a lower incidence of complications and were less likely to be discharged to a higher level of dependency. Registration number: ISRCTN23142588 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bjs.10459

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 349

Metadata

Authors
Partridge, J. S. L., Harari, D., Martin, F. C., Peacock, J. L., Bell, R., Mohammed, A., & Dhesi, J. K.
Venue
British Journal of Surgery
Published
2017-02-15
Volume
104
Issue
6
Pages
679-687
ISSN
  • 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2168
OpenAlex
W2588092511
Cited by
349
References
4
FWCI
15.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.