View Item 

Show simple item record

Intensive care unit versus non–intensive care unit postoperative management of head and neck free flaps: Comparative effectiveness and cost comparisons
dc.contributor.authorArshad, Hassanen_US
dc.contributor.authorOzer, Hatice Gulcinen_US
dc.contributor.authorThatcher, Aaronen_US
dc.contributor.authorOld, Matthewen_US
dc.contributor.authorOzer, Enveren_US
dc.contributor.authorAgarwal, Amiten_US
dc.contributor.authorJafari, Hosseinalien_US
dc.contributor.authorBirkheimer, Danetteen_US
dc.contributor.authorBasinger, Heidien_US
dc.contributor.authorForest, L. Arricken_US
dc.contributor.authorSchuller, David E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorTeknos, Theodoros N.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-21T18:02:59Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_13_MONTHSen_US
dc.date.available2014-05-21T18:02:59Z
dc.date.issued2014-04en_US
dc.identifier.citationArshad, Hassan; Ozer, Hatice Gulcin; Thatcher, Aaron; Old, Matthew; Ozer, Enver; Agarwal, Amit; Jafari, Hosseinali; Birkheimer, Danette; Basinger, Heidi; Forest, L. Arrick; Schuller, David E.; Teknos, Theodoros N. (2014). "Intensive care unit versus non–intensive care unit postoperative management of head and neck free flaps: Comparative effectiveness and cost comparisons." Head & Neck 36(4): 536-539.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1043-3074en_US
dc.identifier.issn1097-0347en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/106719
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherICUen_US
dc.subject.otherFree Flapen_US
dc.subject.otherMicrovascular Reconstructionen_US
dc.subject.otherHead and Necken_US
dc.subject.otherPostoperative Managementen_US
dc.titleIntensive care unit versus non–intensive care unit postoperative management of head and neck free flaps: Comparative effectiveness and cost comparisonsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelOtolaryngologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/106719/1/hed23325.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/hed.23325en_US
dc.identifier.sourceHead & Necken_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHaddock NT, Gobble RM, Levine JP. More consistent postoperative care and monitoring can reduce costs following microvascular free flap reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 2010; 26: 435 – 439.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcMillian WD, Taylor S, Lat I. Sedation, analgesia, and delirium in the critically ill patient. J Pharm Pract 2011; 24: 27 – 34.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcVeigh KP, Moore R, James G, Hall T, Barnard N. Advantages of not using the intensive care unit after operations for oropharyngeal cancer: an audit at Worcester Royal Hospital. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 45: 648 – 651.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAllak A, Nguyen TN, Shonka DC Jr, Reibel JF, Levine PA, Jameson MJ. Immediate postoperative extubation in patients undergoing free tissue transfer. Laryngoscope 2011; 121: 763 – 768.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNkenke E, Vairaktaris E, Stelzle F, Neukam FW, St Pierre M. No reduction in complication rate by stay in the intensive care unit for patients undergoing surgery for head and neck cancer and microvascular reconstruction. Head Neck 2009; 31: 1461 – 1469.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTo EW, Tsang WM, Lai EC, Chu MC. Retrospective study on the need of intensive care unit admission after major head and neck surgery. ANZ J Surg 2002; 72: 11 – 14.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGodden DR, Patel M, Baldwin A, Woodwards RT. Need for intensive care after operations for head and neck cancer surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999; 37: 502 – 505.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpiegel JH, Polat JK. Microvascular flap reconstruction by otolaryngologists: prevalence, postoperative care, and monitoring techniques. Laryngoscope 2007; 117: 485 – 490.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
hed23325.pdf
Size:
92.64KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.