Dataset Information

Contributors to Increased Mortality Associated With Care Fragmentation After Emergency General Surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Care fragmentation at time of readmission after emergency general surgery (EGS) is associated with high mortality; however, the factors underlying this finding remain unclear.

Objective

To identify patient and hospital factors associated with increased mortality among patients after EGS readmitted within 30 days of discharge to a nonindex hospital.

Design, setting, and participants

Retrospective cohort study using the 2014 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Readmissions Database. Participants were all adult patients (18 years or older) who underwent 1 of the 15 most common EGS procedures in the United States from January 1 to November 30, 2014, and survived to discharge. The dates of analysis were October through December 2019.

Exposures

Thirty-day readmission to a hospital other than that of the index surgical procedure. The study examined the association of interventions during readmission, change in hospital resource level, and severity of patient illness during readmission.

Main outcomes and measures

Ninety-day inpatient mortality.

Results

In total, 71 944 patients who underwent EGS (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [18.3] years; 53.5% [38 487 of 71 944] female) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge, of whom 10 495 (14.6%) were readmitted to a nonindex hospital. Compared with patients readmitted to index hospitals, patients readmitted to nonindex hospitals were more likely to be readmitted to hospitals with low annual EGS volume (33.5% vs 25.6%, P < .001) and be in the top half of illness severity profile (37.2% vs 31.2%, P < .001). Overall 90-day mortality was higher in the patients readmitted to nonindex hospitals (6.1% vs 4.3%, P < .001). When adjusted for baseline patient and hospital characteristics, care fragmentation was independently associated with increased mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.17-1.58; P < .001). After adjustment for interventions performed during readmission, change in EGS hospital volume level, and severity of patient illness, care fragmentation was no longer independently associated with mortality (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.88-1.26; P = .58). In this complete model, severity of illness was the strongest risk factor of mortality during readmission.

Conclusions and relevance

In this cohort study of adult patients who require rehospitalization after EGS, 14.6% are readmitted to a hospital other than where the index procedure was performed. Although the overall mortality rate is higher for this population, the excess mortality appears to be primarily associated with severity of patient illness at time of readmission. These data underscore the need to develop systems of care to rapidly triage patients to hospitals best equipped to manage their condition.

SUBMITTER: McCrum ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7376477 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEmergency general surgery (EGS) diseases are time-sensitive conditions that require urgent surgical evaluation, yet the effect of geographic access to care on outcomes remains unclear. We examined the association of spatial access with outcomes for common EGS conditions.MethodsA retrospective analysis of twelve 2014 State Inpatient Databases, identifying adults admitted with eight EGS conditions, was performed. We assessed spatial access using the spatial access ratio (SPAR)-an advanced spatial model that accounts for travel distance, hospital capacity, and population demand, normalized against the national mean. Multivariable regression models adjusting for patient and hospital factors were used to evaluate the association between SPAR with (a) in-hospital mortality and (b) major morbidity.ResultsA total of 877,928 admissions, of which 104,332 (2.4%) were in the lowest-access category (SPAR, 0) and 578,947 (66%) were in the high-access category (SPAR, ≥1), were analyzed. Low-access patients were more likely to be White, male, and treated in nonteaching hospitals. Low-access patients also had higher incidence of complex EGS disease (low access, 31% vs. high access, 12%; p < 0.001) and in-hospital mortality (4.4% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.05). When adjusted for confounding factors, including presence of advanced hospital resources, increasing spatial access was protective against in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.97; p < 0.001). Spatial access was not significantly associated with major morbidity.ConclusionThis is the first study to demonstrate that geospatial access to surgical care is associated with incidence of complex EGS disease and that increasing spatial access to care is independently associated with lower in-hospital mortality. These results support the consideration of spatial access in the development of regional health systems for EGS care.Level of evidencePrognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Expected performance rates for various outcome metrics are a hallmark of hospital quality indicators used by Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and National Quality Forum. The identification of outlier hospitals with above- and below-expected mortality for emergency general surgery (EGS) operations is therefore of great value for EGS quality improvement initiatives. The aim of this study was to determine hospital variation in mortality after EGS operations, and compare characteristics between outlier hospitals. METHODS:Using data from the California State Inpatient Database (2010-2011), we identified patients who underwent one of eight common EGS operations. Expected mortality was obtained from a Bayesian model, adjusting for both patient- and hospital-level variables. A hospital-level standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was constructed (ratio of observed to expected deaths). Only hospitals performing three or more of each operation were included. An "outlier" hospital was defined as having an SMR with 80% confidence interval that did not cross 1.0. High- and low-mortality SMR outliers were compared. RESULTS:There were 140,333 patients included from 220 hospitals. Standardized mortality ratio varied from a high of 2.6 (mortality, 160% higher than expected) to a low of 0.2 (mortality, 80% lower than expected); 12 hospitals were high SMR outliers, and 28 were low SMR outliers. Standardized mortality was over three times worse in the high SMR outliers compared with the low SMR outliers (1.7 vs. 0.5; p < 0.001). Hospital-, patient-, and operative-level characteristics were equivalent in each outlier group. CONCLUSION:There exists significant hospital variation in standardized mortality after EGS operations. High SMR outliers have significant excess mortality, while low SMR outliers have superior EGS survival. Common hospital-level characteristics do not explain the wide gap between underperforming and overperforming outlier institutions. These findings suggest that SMR can help guide assessment of EGS performance across hospitals; further research is essential to identify and define the hospital processes of care which translate into optimal EGS outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Epidemiologic Study, level III.

Project description:BackgroundSocioeconomic disadvantage is associated with worse outcomes after elective surgery, but the effect on emergency general surgery (EGS) remains unclear. We examined the association of socioeconomic disadvantage and outcomes after EGS procedures and investigated whether admission to hospitals with comprehensive clinical and social resources mitigated this effect.MethodsAdults undergoing 1 of the 10 most burdensome high- and low-risk EGS procedures were identified in six 2014 State Inpatient Databases. Socioeconomic disadvantage was assessed using Area Deprivation Index (ADI) of patient residence. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for patient and hospital factors were used to evaluate the association between ADI quartile (high >75 percentile vs. low <25 percentile), and 30-day readmission, in-hospital mortality, and discharge disposition. Effect modification between ADI and (a) level 1 trauma center and (b) safety-net hospital status was tested.ResultsA total of 103,749 patients were analyzed: 72,711 low-risk (70.1%) and 31,038 high-risk procedures (29.9%). Patients from neighborhoods with high socioeconomic disadvantage had a higher proportion with ≥3 comorbidities (41.9% vs. 32.0%), minority race/ethnicity (66.3% vs. 42.4%), and Medicaid (28.8% vs. 14.7%) and were less likely to be treated at level 1 trauma centers (18.3% vs. 27.7%; p < 0.001 for all). Adjusting for competing factors, high socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with increased in-hospital mortality after high-risk procedures (odd ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.66; p = 0.04) and higher odds of non-home discharge (odd ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.30; p = 0.03) for low-risk procedures. Socioeconomic disadvantage was not associated with 30-day readmission for either procedure group. Level 1 trauma status and safety-net hospital did not meaningfully mitigate effect of ADI for any outcome.ConclusionSocioeconomic disadvantage is associated with increased mortality after high-risk procedures and higher odds of non-home discharge after low-risk procedures. This effect was not mitigated by either level 1 trauma or safety-net hospitals. Interventions that specifically address the needs of socially vulnerable communities will be required to significantly improve EGS outcomes for this population.Level of evidencePrognostic and Epidemiologic, level III.

Project description:ImportanceEmergency general surgery (EGS) represents 11% of hospitalizations, and almost half of these hospitalized patients are older adults. Older adults have high rates of mortality and readmissions after EGS, yet little is known as to how these outcomes compare with acute medical conditions that have been targets for quality improvement.ObjectiveTo examine whether Medicare beneficiaries who undergo EGS experience similar 1-year outcomes compared with patients admitted with acute medical conditions.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based, retrospective cohort study using Medicare claims data from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2014, included adults 65 years or older with at least 1 year of Medicare claims who had urgent or emergency admissions for 1 of the 5 highest-burden EGS procedures (partial colectomy, small-bowel resection, peptic ulcer disease surgery, lysis of adhesions, or laparotomy) or a primary diagnosis of an acute medical condition (pneumonia, heart failure, or acute myocardial infarction). Patients undergoing EGS and those with acute medical conditions were matched 1:1 in a 2-step algorithm: (1) exact match by hospital or (2) propensity score match with age, sex, race/ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index, individual comorbid conditions, claims-based frailty index, year of admission, and any intensive care unit stay. Data analysis was performed from July 16, 2018, to November 13, 2019.ExposuresPartial colectomy, small-bowel resection, peptic ulcer disease surgery, lysis of adhesions, or laparotomy or a primary diagnosis pneumonia, heart failure, or acute myocardial infarction.Main outcomes and measuresOne-year mortality, postdischarge health care utilization (emergency department visit, additional hospitalization, intensive care unit stay, or total hospital encounters), and days at home during 1 year.ResultsA total of 481 417 matched pairs (mean [SD] age, 78.9 [7.8] years; 272 482 [56.6%] female) with adequate covariate balance were included in the study. Patients undergoing EGS experienced higher 30-day mortality (60 683 [12.6%] vs 56 713 [11.8%], P < .001) yet lower 1-year mortality (142 846 [29.7%] vs 158 385 [32.9%], P < .001) compared with medical patients. Among 409 363 pairs who survived discharge, medical patients experienced higher rates of total hospital encounters in the year after discharge (4 vs 3 per person-year; incidence rate ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.30-1.32) but had similar mean days at home compared with patients undergoing EGS (293 vs 309 days; incident rate ratio, 1.004; 95% CI, 1.004-1.004).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, older patients undergoing EGS had similarly high 1-year rates of mortality, hospital use, and days away from home as acutely ill medical patients. These findings suggest that EGS should also be targeted for national quality improvement programs.

Project description:ImportanceOwing to lack of adequate emergency care infrastructure and decline in general surgery workforce, the United States faces a crisis in access to emergency general surgery (EGS) care. Acute care surgery (ACS), an organized system of trauma, general surgery, and critical care, is a proposed solution; however, ACS diffusion remains poorly understood.ObjectiveTo investigate geographic diffusion of ACS models of care and characterize the communities in which ACS implementation is lagging.Design, setting, and participantsA national survey on EGS practices was developed, tested, and administered at all 2811 US acute care hospitals providing EGS to adults between August 2015 and October 2015. Surgeons responsible for EGS coverage at these hospitals were approached. If these surgeons failed to respond to the initial survey implementation, secondary surgeons or chief medical officers at hospitals with only 1 general surgeon were approached.InterventionsSurvey responses on ACS implementation were linked with geocoded hospital data and national census data to determine geographic diffusion of and access to ACS.Main outcomes and measuresWe measured the distribution of hospitals with ACS models of care vs those without over time (diffusion) and by US counties characterized by sociodemographic characteristics of county residents (access).ResultsSurvey response rate was 60% (n = 1690); 272 responding hospitals had implemented ACS by 2015, steadily increasing from 34 in 2001 to 125 in 2010. Acute care surgery implementation has not been uniform. Rural regions have limited ACS access, with hospitals in counties with greater than the 75th percentile population having 5.4 times higher odds (95% CI, 1.66-7.35) of implementing ACS than hospitals in counties with less than 25th percentile population. Communities with greater percentages of adults without a college degree also have limited ACS access (OR, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.81-6.48). However, incorporating EGS into ACS models may be a potential equalizer for poor, black, and Hispanic communities.Conclusions and relevanceUnderstanding and addressing gaps in ACS implementation across communities will be crucial to ensuring health equity for US residents experiencing general surgery emergencies.

Project description:IntroductionPeople 65 years and older represent the fastest growing segment of the surgical population. Older age is associated with doubling of risk when undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures and often coexists with medical complexity and considerations of end-of-life care, creating prognostic and decisional uncertainty. Combined with the time-sensitive nature of EGS, it is challenging to gauge perioperative risk and ensure that clinical decisions are aligned with the patient values. Current preoperative risk prediction models for older EGS patients have major limitations regarding derivation and validation, and do not address the specific risk profile of older patients. Accurate and externally validated models specific to older patients are needed to inform care and decision making.Methods and analysisWe will derive, internally and externally validate a multivariable model to predict 30-day mortality in EGS patients >65 years old. Our derivation sample will be individuals enrolled in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database between 2012 and 2016 having 1 of 7 core EGS procedures. Postulated predictor variables have been identified based on previous research, clinical and epidemiological knowledge. Our model will be derived using logistic regression penalised with elastic net regularisation and ensembled using bootstrap aggregation. The resulting model will be internally validated using k-fold cross-validation and bootstrap validation techniques and externally validated using population-based health administrative data. Discrimination and calibration will be reported at each step.Ethics and disseminationEthics for NSQIP data use was obtained from the Ottawa Hospital Research Ethics Board; external validation will use routinely collected anonymised data legally exempt from research ethics review. The final risk score will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. We plan to further disseminate the model as an online calculator or application for clinical use. Future research will be required to test the clinical application of the final model.

Project description:BackgroundEmergency general surgery (EGS) is associated with increased mortality, with kidney failure a contributing risk, but comparative outcomes between patients with kidney failure and the general population are lacking.MethodsIn this retrospective population-cohort study, data were analysed for all EGS procedures performed in England between 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2019. EGS was defined as partial colectomy, small bowel resection, cholecystectomy, appendicectomy, lysis of peritoneal adhesions, surgery for peptic ulcer, or laparotomy. The main outcome measure was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and all-cause mortality after surgery.ResultsFrom 691 064 procedures, 0.16 per cent (n = 1097) and 0.23 per cent (n = 1567) were performed on kidney transplant and dialysis recipients respectively. Laparotomy was the most frequent EGS procedure for kidney transplant (46 per cent of procedures, n = 507) and dialysis (45 per cent of procedures, n = 704) recipients, with the highest 30-day and 1-year mortality. In logistic regression analysis, both kidney failure cohorts had higher risk for experiencing MACEs in the postoperative interval after emergency laparotomy; within 3 months (dialysis; OR 2.44 (95 per cent c.i. 2.08 to 2.87), P < 0.001 and transplant; OR 2.05 (95 per cent c.i. 1.57 to 2.68), P < 0.001) and within 1 year (dialysis; OR 2.39 (95 per cent c.i. 2.06 to 2.77), P < 0.001 and transplant; OR 2.21 (95 per cent c.i. 1.76 to 2.77), P < 0.001); however, in a propensity-score-matched cohort, increased risk for MACEs was observed among dialysis patients after emergency laparotomy (HR 2.10 (95 per cent c.i. 1.82 to 2.43), P < 0.001) but not kidney transplant recipients (HR 1.17 (95 per cent c.i. 0.97 to 1.41), P = 0.096).ConclusionMortality after emergency surgery is higher for patients with kidney failure and dialysis is worse than kidney transplantation, with cardiovascular deaths more common than the general population.