Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Mar 15.
Published in final edited form as: Cancer. 2010 Jan 15;116(2):331–339. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24763

Table 4.

Unadjusted and Propensity Score Matching Method Determination of the Risk Difference of Having a Complication for Subjects Who Underwent Continent Diversion Compared With Those Who Underwent Ileal Conduit Urinary Diversion

Complication Unadjusted Risk Difference (P) Propensity Score Matched ATT (95% CI)
Medical complications
 Any medical complication −0.058 (.002) −0.028 (−0.070 to 0.005)
 Cardiovascular complications −0.014 (.26) 0.012 (−0.012 to 0.038)
 Respiratory complications −0.025 (.08) −0.015 (−0.044 to 0.012)
 Other medical complications −0.045 (.004) −0.031 (−0.061 to 0.001)
Surgical complications
 Any surgical complication −0.063 (.001) −0.050 (−0.090 to 0.011)
 Bowel complications −0.037 (.04) −0.031 (−0.068 to 0.001)
 Urinary complications −0.009 (.03) −0.012 (−0.023 to −0.004)
 Wound complications −0.001 (.82) 0.001 (−0.014 to 0.015)
 Other surgical complications −0.033 (.02) −0.030 (−0.062 to −0.004)
Disposition complications
 Disposition other than home −0.100 (<.001) −0.082 (−0.121 to −0.046)
 Prolonged length of staya −0.012 (.36) −0.005 (−0.027 to 0.018)
Death during hospitalization 0.003 (.96) 0.008 (−0.002 to 0.020)

ATT indicates average treatment effect in the treated from the propensity score matching algorithm (analogous to the risk difference comparing the likelihood of each complication outcome among continent diversion subjects compared with those who underwent ileal conduit urinary diversions); 95% CI, 95% confidence interval.

a

Based on 90th percentile length of stay or >17 days.