Cited by 89Diabetes Management and ResearchChronic Disease Management StrategiesEmergency and Acute Care Studies

Total and excess bed occupancy by age, specialty and insulin use for nearly one million diabetes patients discharged from all English Acute Hospitals

Sampson, Mike J., Dozio, Nicoletta, Ferguson, Brian, Dhatariya, Ketan·2007·Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice

Abstract

To investigate total diabetes bed occupancy and prolonged inpatient length of stay (LOS) in all English Acute Hospitals, we analysed hospital episode statistics (HES) discharge data for all English Acute Hospitals over 4 years for ICD10 discharge codes of E10 ('insulin-dependent diabetes') or E11 ('non-insulin dependent diabetes') by age-band (18-60, 61-75 and >75 years) and specialties. We matched these data to control discharges without these codes. There were 943,613 diabetes discharges (6,508,668 bed days) and 10,724,414 matched controls. Mean diabetes LOS increased with age for each specialty and both E10 and E11 codes, but excess diabetes LOS decreased with age. Excess diabetes LOS was <1.0 days in most groups and highest (1.2 days) in insulin-dependent surgical patients under 60 years old, where 19.7% of bed days were excess. A similar pattern was seen for 76,570 diabetes inpatients with key cardiac or surgical conditions. Excess bed occupancy due to prolonged mean LOS accounted for 325,033 bed days under general medical and surgical codes. There were 25,525 discharges with diabetic ketoacidosis (126,495 bed days) in these 4 years. Excess diabetes LOS is concentrated in younger age groups. Excess bed occupancy due to prolonged LOS in medical and surgical inpatients is three times greater than bed occupancy due to diabetic ketoacidosis. Strategies to reduce excess diabetes bed occupancy should emphasize reducing inpatient LOS in younger inpatients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.diabres.2006.10.004

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 28 · Cited by 89

Authors
Sampson, M. J., Dozio, N., Ferguson, B., & Dhatariya, K.
Affiliations
  • Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (GB)
  • University of York (GB)
Venue
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-07
Volume
77
Issue
1
Pages
92-98
ISSN
0168-8227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139070835
Cited by
89
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
Keywords
diabetes mellitus, hospital bed occupancy, length of hospital stay, age differences, diabetic ketoacidosis, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, hospital discharge data
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Bed Occupancy, Cardiovascular Diseases, Diabetes Mellitus, England, Geriatrics, Hospitals, Public, Humans, Length of Stay, Middle Aged, Patient Discharge, Surgical Procedures, Operative, Cardiology Service, Hospital, Orthopedic Procedures, International Classification of Diseases

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