Does the Halo Effect for Level 1 Trauma Centers Apply to High-Acuity Nonsurgical Admissions?

CONTEXT: The halo effect describes the improved surgical outcomes at trauma centers for nontrauma conditions. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether level 1 trauma centers have improved inpatient mortality for common but high-acuity nonsurgical diagnoses (eg, acute myocardial infarction [AMI], congestive heart failure [CHF], and pneumonia [PNA]) compared with non--level 1 trauma centers. METHODS: The authors conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study analyzing data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database. Patients who were admitted with AMI, CHF, and PNA between 2006-2011 in Florida and California were included. Level 1 trauma centers were matched to non-level 1 trauma centers using propensity scoring. The primary outcome was risk-adjusted inpatient mortality for each diagnosis (AMI, CHF, or PNA). RESULTS: Of the 190,474 patients who were hospitalized for AMI, CHF, or PNA, 94,037 patients (49%) underwent treatment at level 1 trauma centers. The inpatient mortality rates at level 1 trauma centers vs non-level 1 trauma centers for patients with AMI was 8.10% vs 8.40%, respectively (P=.73); for patients with CHF, 2.26% vs 2.71% (P=.90); and for patients with PNA, 2.30% vs 2.70% (P=.25). CONCLUSION: Level 1 trauma center designation was not associated with improved mortality for high-acuity, nonsurgical medical conditions in this study.

Discordance between surgical care improvement project adherence and postoperative outcomes: implications for new Joint Commission standards.

BACKGROUND: Infectious (INF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) complication rates are targeted by surgical care improvement project (SCIP) INF and SCIP VTE measures. We analyzed how adherence to SCIP INF and SCIP VTE affects targeted postoperative outcomes (wound complication [WC], deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism [PE]) using all-payer data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review (2007-2011) was conducted using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database Florida and Medicare's Hospital Compare. The association between SCIP adherence rates and outcomes across 355 included surgical procedures was measured using multilevel mixed-effects linear regression models. RESULTS: One hundred sixty acute care hospitals and 779,922 patients were included. Over 5 y, SCIP INF-1, -2, and -3 adherence improved by 12.5%, 8.0%, and 20.9%, respectively, whereas postoperative WC rate decreased by 14.8%. When controlling for time, SCIP INF-1 adherence was associated with improvement of postoperative WC rates (ß = -0.0044, P = 0.005), whereas SCIP INF-2 adherence was associated with increased WCs (ß = 0.0031, P = 0.018). SCIP VTE-1, -2 adherence improved by 14.6% and 20.2%, respectively, whereas postoperative deep vein thrombosis rate increased by 7.1% and postoperative PE rate increased by 3.7%. SCIP VTE-1 and -2 adherence were both associated with increased postoperative PE when controlling for time (SCIP VTE-1: ß = 0.0019, P < 0.001; SCIP VTE-2: ß = 0.0015, P < 0.001). Readmission analysis found SCIP INF-1 adherence to be associated with improved 30-d WC rates when controlling for patient and hospital characteristics (ß = -0.0021, P = 0.032), whereas SCIP INF-3 adherence was associated with increased 30-d WC rates when controlling for time (ß = 0.0007, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Only SCIP INF-1 adherence was associated with improved outcomes. The Joint Commission has retired SCIP INF-2, -3, and SCIP VTE-2 and made SCIP INF-1 and VTE-1 reporting optional. Our study supports continued reporting of SCIP INF-1.

Transient atrial fibrillation after open abdominal aortic revascularization surgery is associated with increased length of stay, mortality, and readmission rates.

BACKGROUND: It is well established that transient postoperative atrial fibrillation (TPAF) is associated with adverse postoperative outcomes after major cardiac and noncardiac operations. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the incidence, impact, and risk factors associated with the development of TPAF in patients undergoing revascularization surgery for occlusive diseases of the abdominal aorta and its branches (AAB). METHODS: By use of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database from Florida and California, patients who underwent open revascularization of AAB between 2006 and 2011 were identified. Patients diagnosed with aortic dissection or abdominal aortic aneurysm were excluded to limit the study cohort to include only patients with occlusive etiology. Also excluded were those with a pre-existing diagnosis of atrial fibrillation and those who underwent thoracic aortic repair and peripheral artery revascularization procedures. Multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses with treatment effects were conducted to analyze the association between TPAF and length of stay (LOS); the mortality rates at index admission, 1 month, and 1 year; and the readmission rates at 1 month and 1 year (adjusted for comorbidities and surgical and demographic factors). A backwards stepwise logistic regression model was built to identify predictors of TPAF. RESULTS: A total of 4462 patients were identified; 3253 underwent aortoiliac/femoral bypasses (72.9%), 1514 endarterectomies of AAB (33.9%), and 288 bypasses of AAB (6.5%). The incidence of TPAF was 2.4% (109 patients). Multivariate regression analysis with treatment effects showed that TPAF was associated with significantly increased LOS, mortality, and readmission rates. Factors identified as predictors of TPAF by backwards stepwise logistic regression modeling include electrolyte disorders, increasing age, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (C statistic = .69; accuracy = 58%). CONCLUSIONS: TPAF after revascularization of AAB is associated with increased LOS, inpatient mortality, 1-year mortality, and hospital readmissions. Strategies to identify patients at risk for development of TPAF and implementation of appropriate prophylactic measures may improve surgical outcomes and reduce cost of care.

"Take the Volume Pledge" may result in disparity in access to care.

BACKGROUND: "Take the Volume Pledge" proposes restricting pancreatectomies to hospitals that perform ≥20 per year. Our purpose was to identify those factors that characterize patients at risk for loss of access to pancreatic cancer care with enforcement of volume standards. METHODS: Using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database from Florida, we identified patients who underwent pancreatectomy for pancreatic malignancy from 2007-2011. American Hospital Association and United States Census Bureau data were linked to patient-level data. High-volume hospitals were defined as performing ≥20 pancreatic resections per year. Univariable and multivariable statistics compared patient characteristics and utilization of high-volume hospitals. Classification and Regression Tree modeling was used to predict patients at risk for losing access to care. RESULTS: Our study included 1,663 patients. Five high-volume hospitals were identified, and they treated 1,056 (63.5%) patients. Patients residing far from high-volume hospitals, in areas with the highest population density, non-Caucasian ethnicity, and greater income had decreased odds of obtaining care at high-volume hospitals. Using these factors, we developed a Classification and Regression Tree-based predictive tool to identify these patients. CONCLUSION: Implementation of "Take the Volume Pledge" is an important step toward improving pancreatectomy outcomes; however, policymakers must consider the potential impact on limiting access and possible health disparities that may arise.

Impact of Post-Hospital Syndrome on Outcomes Following Elective, Ambulatory Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether post-hospital syndrome (PHS) places patients undergoing elective hernia repair at increased risk for adverse postoperative events. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PHS is a transient period of health vulnerability following inpatient hospitalization for acute illness. PHS has been well studied in nonsurgical populations, but its effect on surgical outcomes is unclear. METHODS: State-specific datasets for California in 2011 available through the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) were linked. Patients older than 18 years who underwent elective hernia repair were included. The primary exposure variable was PHS, defined as any inpatient admission within 90 days of an elective hernia repair performed in an ambulatory surgery center. The primary outcome was an adverse event, defined as any unplanned emergency department visit or inpatient admission within 30 days postoperatively. Mixed-effects logistic models were used for multivariable analyses. RESULTS: A total of 57,988 patients met inclusion criteria. The 30-day risk-adjusted adverse event rate was significantly higher for PHS patients versus non-PHS patients (11.8% vs 5.8%, P < 0.001). PHS patients were more likely than non-PHS patients to experience postoperative complications (odds ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.0). Adverse events attributable to PHS cost an additional $63,533.46 per 100 cases in California. The risk of adverse events due to PHS remained elevated throughout the 90-day window between hospitalization and surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients hospitalized within 90 days of an elective surgery are at increased risk of adverse events postoperatively. The impact of PHS on outcomes is independent of baseline patient characteristics, medical comorbidities, quality of center performing the surgery, and reason for hospitalization before elective surgery. Adverse events owing to PHS are costly and represent a quality improvement target.

Perioperative support, not volume, is necessary to optimize outcomes in surgical management of necrotizing enterocolitis.

BACKGROUND: This study examines the relationship between hospital volume of surgical cases for necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and patient outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional review was performed using the HCUP SID for California from 2007 to 2011. Patients with NEC who underwent surgery were identified using ICD-9CM codes. Risk-adjusted models were constructed with mixed-effects logistic regression using patient and demographic covariates. RESULTS: 23 hospitals with 618 patients undergoing NEC-related surgical intervention were included. Overall mortality rate was 22.5%. There were no significant differences in the number of NICU beds (p = 0.135) or NICU intensivists (p = 0.469) between high and low volume hospitals. Following risk adjustment, no difference in mortality rate was observed between high and low volume hospitals respectively (24.0% vs. 20.3%, p = 0.555). CONCLUSIONS: Our observation that neonates with NEC treated at low-volume centers have no increased risk of mortality may be explained by similar availability of NICU and intensivists resources across hospitals.

Characterizing the role of a high-volume cancer resection ecosystem on low-volume, high-quality surgical care.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to determine the hospital resources required for low-volume, high-quality care at high-volume cancer resection centers. METHODS: Patients who underwent esophageal, pancreatic, and rectal resection for malignancy were identified using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database (Florida and California) between 2007 and 2011. Annual case volume by procedure was used to identify high- and low-volume centers. Hospital data were obtained from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database. Procedure risk-adjusted mortality was calculated for each hospital using multilevel, mixed-effects models. RESULTS: A total of 24,784 patients from 302 hospitals met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 13 hospitals were classified as having a high-volume, oncologic resection ecosystem by being a high-volume hospital for ≥2 studied procedures. A total of 11 of 31 studied hospital factors were strongly associated with hospitals that performed a high volume of cancer resections and were used to develop the High Volume Ecosystem for Oncologic Resections (HIVE-OR) score. At low-volume centers, increasing HIVE-OR score resulted in decreased mortality for rectal cancer resection (P = .038). HIVE-OR was not related to risk-adjusted mortality for esophagectomy (P = .421) or pancreatectomy (P = .413) at low-volume centers. CONCLUSION: Our study found that in some settings, low-volume, high-quality cancer surgical care can be explained by having a high-volume ecosystem.