Table 5.
Resource utilization
| Outcome | Patients, n | Descriptive outcome | Effect (regression DD vs. pre-DD) | |||
| Pre-DD | DD | Pre-DD | DD | Difference, mean (95% CI) | Significance, p value | |
| Survey at 3 months | ||||||
| Return-to-sports (days), mean (SD) | 90 | 80 | 29.2 (24.7) | 26.6 (25.3) | −3.49 (−10.61 to 3.97) | 0.372 |
| Return-to-work (days), mean (SD) | 58 | 73 | 13.3 (21.0) | 9.1 (14.8) | −0.165 (−4.91 to 1.44) | 0.313 |
| Return-to-school (days), mean (SD) | 59 | 44 | 2.3 (3.4) | 1.9 (2.1) | −0.43 (−0.17 to 0.59) | 0.456 |
| OR (95% CI) | ||||||
| Visited general practitioner, n (%) | 144 | 153 | 34 (23.6) | 40 (26.1) | 1.08 (0.63 to 1.85) | 0.784 |
| Visited physiotherapist, n (%) | 144 | 153 | 38 (26.4) | 32 (20.9) | 0.70 (0.41 to 1.21) | 0.197 |
| Missed school for follow-up, n (%) | 59 | 44 | 34 (57.6) | 5 (11.4) | 0.084 (0.028 to 0.253) | <0.001 |
| Missed work for follow-up, n (%) | 58 | 73 | 26 (44.8) | 6 (8.2) | 0.110 (0.041 to 0.296) | <0.001 |
| EPR evaluation (range 14–26 months) | Difference, mean (95% CI) | |||||
| Number of hospital visits, mean (SD) | 348 | 371 | 1.80 (1.13) | 0.14 (0.47) | −1.68 (−1.81 to −1.55) | <0.001 |
| With physician | 1.62 (0.94) | 0.11 (0.44) | −1.53 (−1.65 to −1.42) | <0.001 | ||
| With plaster technician | 0.18 (0.51) | 0.05 (0.26) | −0.13 (−0.19 to −0.07) | <0.001 | ||
| Imaging during follow-up, mean (SD) | 348 | 371 | ||||
| X-ray | 0.30 (0.65) | 0.05 (0.32) | −0.26 (−0.33 to 0.18) | <0.001 | ||
| CT scan | 0.0 | 0.01 (0.07) | NP | – | ||
| MRI scan | 0.0 | 0.0 | NP | – | ||
| No-shows, n (%) | 348 | 371 | 9 (2.6) | 0.0 | NP | – |
Propensity score-adjusted linear regression performed to analyze continuous data with bootstrapping for non-normal distribution and binary logistic to analyze dichotomous data.
A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
DD, direct discharge; EPR, electronic patient record; NP, not performed (as the number of observations was too small to perform bootstrapping (if applicable) and subsequent regression).