Dataset Information

Readmission destination and risk of mortality after major surgery: an observational cohort study.

ABSTRACT: Hospital readmissions are common after major surgery, although it is unknown whether patients achieve improved outcomes when they are readmitted to, and receive care at, the index hospital where their surgical procedure was done. We examined the association between readmission destination and mortality risk in the USA in Medicare beneficiaries after a range of common operations.By use of claims data from Medicare beneficiaries in the USA between Jan 1, 2001, and Nov 15, 2011, we assessed patients who needed hospital readmission within 30 days after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, infrainguinal arterial bypass, aortobifemoral bypass, coronary artery bypass surgery, oesophagectomy, colectomy, pancreatectomy, cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, craniotomy, hip replacement, or knee replacement. We used logistic regression models incorporating inverse probability weighting and instrumental variable analysis to measure associations between readmission destination (index vs non-index hospital) and risk of 90 day mortality for patients who underwent surgery who needed hospital readmission.9,440,503 patients underwent one of 12 major operations, and the number of patients readmitted or transferred back to the index hospital where their operation was done varied from 186,336 (65·8%) of 283,131 patients who were readmitted after coronary artery bypass grafting, to 142,142 (83·2%) of 170,789 patients who were readmitted after colectomy. Readmission was more likely to be to the index hospital than to a non-index hospital if the readmission was for a surgical complication (189,384 [23%] of 834,070 patients readmitted to index hospital vs 36,792 [13%] of 276,976 patients readmitted non-index hospital, p<0·0001). Readmission to the index hospital was associated with a 26% lower risk of 90 day mortality than was readmission to a non-index hospital, with inverse probability weighting used to control for selection bias (odds ratio [OR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·66-0·83). This effect was significant (p<0·0001) for all procedures in inverse probability-weighted models, and was largest for patients who were readmitted after pancreatectomy (OR 0·56, 95% CI 0·45-0·69) and aortobifemoral bypass (OR 0·69, 95% CI 0·61-0·77). By use of hospital-level variation among regional index hospital readmission rates as an instrument, instrumental variable analysis showed that the patients with the highest probability of returning to the index hospital had 8% lower risk of mortality (OR 0·92 95% CI 0·91-0·94) than did patients who were less likely to be readmitted to the index hospital.In the USA, patients who are readmitted to hospital after various major operations consistently achieve improved survival if they return to the hospital where their surgery took place. These findings might have important implications for cost-effectiveness-driven regional centralisation of surgical care.None.

SUBMITTER: Brooke BS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4851558 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Readmission destination and risk of mortality after major surgery: an observational cohort study.

Brooke Benjamin S BS Goodney Philip P PP Kraiss Larry W LW Gottlieb Daniel J DJ Samore Matthew H MH Finlayson Samuel R G SR

Lancet (London, England) 20150617 9996

<h4>Background</h4>Hospital readmissions are common after major surgery, although it is unknown whether patients achieve improved outcomes when they are readmitted to, and receive care at, the index hospital where their surgical procedure was done. We examined the association between readmission destination and mortality risk in the USA in Medicare beneficiaries after a range of common operations.<h4>Methods</h4>By use of claims data from Medicare beneficiaries in the USA between Jan 1, 2001, an ...[more]

PMID: 26093917

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPreoperative risk prediction is important for guiding clinical decision-making and resource allocation. Clinicians frequently rely solely on their own clinical judgement for risk prediction rather than objective measures. We aimed to compare the accuracy of freely available objective surgical risk tools with subjective clinical assessment in predicting 30-day mortality.Methods and findingsWe conducted a prospective observational study in 274 hospitals in the United Kingdom (UK), Australia, and New Zealand. For 1 week in 2017, prospective risk, surgical, and outcome data were collected on all adults aged 18 years and over undergoing surgery requiring at least a 1-night stay in hospital. Recruitment bias was avoided through an ethical waiver to patient consent; a mixture of rural, urban, district, and university hospitals participated. We compared subjective assessment with 3 previously published, open-access objective risk tools for predicting 30-day mortality: the Portsmouth-Physiology and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality (P-POSSUM), Surgical Risk Scale (SRS), and Surgical Outcome Risk Tool (SORT). We then developed a logistic regression model combining subjective assessment and the best objective tool and compared its performance to each constituent method alone. We included 22,631 patients in the study: 52.8% were female, median age was 62 years (interquartile range [IQR] 46 to 73 years), median postoperative length of stay was 3 days (IQR 1 to 6), and inpatient 30-day mortality was 1.4%. Clinicians used subjective assessment alone in 88.7% of cases. All methods overpredicted risk, but visual inspection of plots showed the SORT to have the best calibration. The SORT demonstrated the best discrimination of the objective tools (SORT Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-0.92; P-POSSUM = 0.89, 95% CI 0.88-0.91; SRS = 0.85, 95% CI 0.82-0.87). Subjective assessment demonstrated good discrimination (AUROC = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.86-0.91) that was not different from the SORT (p = 0.309). Combining subjective assessment and the SORT improved discrimination (bootstrap optimism-corrected AUROC = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.90-0.94) and demonstrated continuous Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.06-0.20, p < 0.001) compared with subjective assessment alone. Decision-curve analysis (DCA) confirmed the superiority of the SORT over other previously published models, and the SORT-clinical judgement model again performed best overall. Our study is limited by the low mortality rate, by the lack of blinding in the 'subjective' risk assessments, and because we only compared the performance of clinical risk scores as opposed to other prediction tools such as exercise testing or frailty assessment.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that the combination of subjective assessment with a parsimonious risk model improved perioperative risk estimation. This may be of value in helping clinicians allocate finite resources such as critical care and to support patient involvement in clinical decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundThe revised-Risk Analysis Index (RAI-rev) can accurately predict postoperative mortality risk. However, the association of RAI-rev with composite outcome of major morbidity and mortality (MMM) among older surgical patients is largely unknown. This study investigated the association between RAI-rev and postoperative MMM in older patients undergoing abdominal surgery. It also assessed the predictive value of RAI-rev combined with other preoperative risk factors.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records of all patients aged 65 and older who underwent abdominal surgery between January 2018 and December 2019. The primary outcome was the postoperative MMM during hospitalization, and its association with preoperative RAI-rev scores was assessed using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The prediction of postoperative outcomes was used the receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis.ResultsA total of 2225 older patients were analyzed, and 258 (11.6%) developed postoperative MMM. After adjusting for confounders, each unit increase in RAI-rev scores resulted in a 2.3% increase in the MMM risk and a 3.0% increase in the odds of life-threatening complications and mortality (both P < 0.05). The area under the curves (AUCs) of RAI-rev scores in predicting MMM and life-threatening complications and mortality was 0.604 (95% CI: 0.567 to 0.640) and 0.633 (95% CI: 0.592 to 0.675), respectively (both P < 0.001); when the RAI-rev was combined with age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, operative stress, and urgency status of surgery (emergency or elective), the AUCs were 0.694 (95% CI: 0.659 to 0.729) and 0.739 (95% CI: 0.702 to 0.777), respectively (both P < 0.001).ConclusionsHigher RAI-rev scores were independently associated with increased risk of MMM. When combined with age, gender, ASA classification, operative stress, and urgency status of surgery, RAI-rev had improved performance in predicting the risk of MMM, particularly the life-threatening complications and mortality.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe rates and risk factors for prolonged postoperative use of opioids in patients who had not previously used opioids and undergoing major elective surgery.DesignPopulation based retrospective cohort study.SettingAcute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada, between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2010.Participants39,140 opioid naïve patients aged 66 years or older who had major elective surgery, including cardiac, intrathoracic, intra-abdominal, and pelvic procedures.Main outcome measureProlonged opioid use after discharge, as defined by ongoing outpatient prescriptions for opioids for more than 90 days after surgery.ResultsOf the 39,140 patients in the entire cohort, 49.2% (n=19,256) were discharged from hospital with an opioid prescription, and 3.1% (n=1229) continued to receive opioids for more than 90 days after surgery. Following risk adjustment with multivariable logistic regression modelling, patient related factors associated with significantly higher risks of prolonged opioid use included younger age, lower household income, specific comorbidities (diabetes, heart failure, pulmonary disease), and use of specific drugs preoperatively (benzodiazepines, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors). The type of surgical procedure was also highly associated with prolonged opioid use. Compared with open radical prostatectomies, both open and minimally invasive thoracic procedures were associated with significantly higher risks (odds ratio 2.58, 95% confidence interval 2.03 to 3.28 and 1.95 1.36 to 2.78, respectively). Conversely, open and minimally invasive major gynaecological procedures were associated with significantly lower risks (0.73, 0.55 to 0.98 and 0.45, 0.33 to 0.62, respectively).ConclusionsApproximately 3% of previously opioid naïve patients continued to use opioids for more than 90 days after major elective surgery. Specific patient and surgical characteristics were associated with the development of prolonged postoperative use of opioids. Our findings can help better inform understanding about the long term risks of opioid treatment for acute postoperative pain and define patient subgroups that warrant interventions to prevent progression to prolonged postoperative opioid use.

Dataset Information

Readmission destination and risk of mortality after major surgery: an observational cohort study.

Publications

Readmission destination and risk of mortality after major surgery: an observational cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets