How DRGs hurt academic health systems.

BACKGROUND: Academic health centers continue their mission of clinical care, education, and research. This mission predisposes them to accept patients regardless of their individual clinical variation and financial risk. The purpose of this study is to assess the variation in costs and the attendant financial risk associated with these patients. In addition, we propose a new reimbursement methodology for academic health center high-end DRGs that better aligns financial risks. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed clinical and financial data from the University of Michigan data warehouse for FY1999 (n = 39,804). The diagnosis-related groups were classified by volume (group 1, low volume to group 4, high volume). The coefficient of variation for total cost per admission was then calculated for each DRG classification. A regression analysis was also performed to assess how costs in the first 3 days estimated total costs. A hybrid methodology to estimate costs was then determined and its accuracy benchmarked against actual Medicare and Blue Cross reimbursements. RESULTS: Low-volume DRGs (< 75 annual admissions) had the highest coefficient of variation relative to each of the three other DRG classifications (moderate to high volume, groups 2, 3, and 4). The regression analysis accurately estimated costs (within 25% of actual costs) in 64.7% of patients with a length of stay > or = 4 days (n = 16,287). This regression fared well compared with actual FY 1999 DRG-based Medicare and Blue Cross reimbursements (n = 9,085 with length of stay > or = 4 days), which accurately reimbursed the University of Michigan Health System in only 43.9% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Academic health centers receive a disproportionate number of admissions to low-volume, high-variation DRGs. This clinical variation translates into financial risk. Traditional risk management strategies are difficult to use in health care settings. The application of our proposed reimbursement methodology better distributes risk between payers and providers, and reduces adverse selection and incentive problems ("moral hazard").

Efficacy of the laparoscopic approach for anterior lumbar spinal fusion.

BACKGROUND: This study compares the immediate postoperative outcomes in patients who undergo laparoscopic and open anterior lumbar spinal fusion and describes the learning curve associated with the performance of this procedure. METHODS: The charts of patients who underwent anterior lumbar spinal fusion between January 1995 and July 1999 were reviewed. Data pertaining to the operation and postoperative course were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients underwent anterior lumbar spinal fusion. Fourteen patients were excluded; a full analysis was performed on the records of the remaining 75 patients. Fifty-five patients underwent an attempted laparoscopic procedure, and 20 patients underwent an open procedure. The conversion rate was 38% (21/55 patients) in the group who underwent the laparoscopic procedure. In the 34 patients whose laparoscopic procedure was completed, there was significantly less blood loss and shorter postoperative ileus, but the operative time was longer, when compared with patients who underwent the open procedure. The laparoscopic procedures performed in 1999 resulted in fewer conversions, less blood loss, and a shorter operating room time, when compared with the laparoscopic procedures in 1998. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic anterior lumbar spinal fusion improves immediate postoperative results when compared with open anterior lumbar spinal fusion.

Prophylactic vena caval filters in trauma: the rest of the story.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe outcomes for patients with trauma who had vena caval filters placed in the absence of venous thromboembolic disease (group P) and compare them with outcomes for patients with trauma who had filters placed after either deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism (group T). DESIGN: The study is a case series of consecutive patients who received vena caval filters after traumatic injury. Data were collected prospectively at the time of filter placement from reports of diagnostic studies obtained for clinical indications and during the annual follow-up examinations. Event rate findings are based on objective tests. Data were obtained from the Michigan Vena Cava Filter Registry. RESULTS: Filters were placed in 385 patients with trauma; 249 of these filters were prophylactic (group P). Event rates were similar in the two groups. New pulmonary embolism was diagnosed in 1.5% of the patients in group P and 2% of the patients in group T. Caval occlusion rates were 3.5% for group P and 2.3% for group T. In all, 15.6% of the patients in group P had deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism after placement. The frequencies of lower extremity swelling and use of support hose were higher in group T than in group P (43% vs 25% and 25% vs 3.5%, respectively; P <.005). Outcomes were comparable in the two groups with respect to mechanical stability of the filter. CONCLUSIONS: The prophylactic indication for vena caval filter placement in patients with trauma is associated with a low incidence of adverse outcomes while providing protection from fatal pulmonary embolism. The current challenge is to limit the number of unnecessary placements through improved methods of risk stratification.

Length of stay has minimal impact on the cost of hospital admission.

BACKGROUND: Hospital cost containment, cost reduction, and alternative care delivery systems continue to preoccupy health care providers, payers, employers, and policy makers throughout the United States. The universal metric for gauging the success of these efforts is hospital length of stay (LOS). Reducing the LOS purportedly yields large cost savings. The purpose of this study is to assess precisely how much hospitals save by shortening LOS. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed the cost-accounting records of all surviving patients (n = 12,365) discharged from our academic medical center during fiscal year 1998 with LOS of 4 days or more. Actual costs were identified through the University of Michigan cost-accounting system. Individual patient costs were broken out on a daily basis and then decomposed further into variable direct, fixed direct, and indirect categories. The population was analyzed by determining the incremental resource cost of the last full day of stay versus the total cost for the entire stay. The data were also stratified by LOS and by surgical costs. An analysis of all trauma patients was then performed on all patients discharged from the hospital's adult level I trauma center (n = 665). Costs were determined on specific days, including admission day, each ICU day, day of discharge from the ICU, and each of the last 2 days before the discharge day. RESULTS: The incremental costs incurred by patients on their last full day of hospital stay were $420 per day on average, or just 2.4% of the $17,734 mean total cost of stay for all 12,365 patients. Mean end-of-stay costs represented only a slightly higher percentage of total costs when LOS was short (e.g., 6.8% for patients with LOS of 4 days). Even when the data were stratified to focus on patients without major operations, the $432 average last-day variable direct cost was only 3.4% of the $12,631 average total cost of care. A focus on the trauma center helps to explain this phenomenon. For our trauma center, variable direct costs accounted for 42% of the mean total cost per patient of $22,067. The remaining 58% was hospital overhead (fixed and indirect costs). The median variable direct cost on the first day of admission is $1,246, and the median variable direct cost on discharge is $304. Approximately 40% of the variable costs are incurred during the first 3 days of admission. CONCLUSIONS: For most patients, the costs directly attributable to the last day of a hospital stay are an economically insignificant component of total costs. Reducing LOS by as much as 1 full day reduces the total cost of care on average by 3% or less. Going forward, physicians and administrators must deemphasize LOS and focus instead on process changes that better use capacity and alter care delivery during the early stages of admission, when resource consumption is most intense.

Academic health systems management: the rationale behind capitated contracts.

OBJECTIVE: To determine why hospitals enter into "capitated" contracts, which often generate accounting losses. The authors' hypothesis is that hospitals coordinate contracts to keep beds full and that in principal, capitated contracts reflect sound capacity management. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In high-overhead industries, different consumers pay different prices for similar services (e.g., full-fare vs. advanced-purchase plane tickets, full tuition vs. financial aid). Some consumers gain access by paying less than total cost. Hospitals, like other high-overhead business enterprises, must optimize the use of their capacity, amortizing overhead over as many patients as possible. This necessity for enhanced throughput forces hospitals and health systems to discount empty beds, sometimes to the point where they incur accounting losses serving some payors. METHODS: The authors analyzed the cost accounting system at their university teaching hospital to compare hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) lengths of stay (LOS), variable direct costs (VDC), overhead of capitated patients, and reimbursement versus other payors for all hospital discharges (n = 29,036) in fiscal year 1998. The data were analyzed by diagnosis-related groups (DRGs), length of stay (LOS), insurance carrier, proximity to hospital, and discharge disposition. Patients were then distinguished across payor categories based on their resource utilization, proximity to the hospital, DRG, LOS, and discharge status. RESULTS: The mean cost for capitated patients was $4,887, less than half of the mean cost of $10,394 for the entire hospitalized population. The mean capitated reimbursement was $928/day, exceeding the mean daily VDC of $616 but not the total cost of $1,445/day. Moreover, the mean total cost per patient day of treating a capitated patient was $400 less than the mean total cost per day for noncapitated patients. The hospital's capitated health maintenance organization (HMO) patients made up 16. 0% of the total admissions but only 9.4% of the total patient days. Both the mean LOS of 3.4 days and the mean ICU LOS of 0.3 days were significantly different from the overall values of 5.8 days and 1 day, respectively, for the noncapitated population. For patients classified with a DRG with complication who traveled from more than 60 miles away, the mean LOS was 10.7 days and the mean total cost was $21,658. This is in contrast to all patients who traveled greater than 60 miles, who had an LOS of 7.2 days and a mean total cost of $12,569. CONCLUSION: The capitated payor directed the bulk of its subscribers to one hospital (other payors transferred their sicker patients). This was reflected in the capitated group's lower costs and LOS. This stable stream of relatively low-acuity patients enhanced capacity utilization. For capitated patients, the hospital still benefits by recovering the incremental cost (VDC) of treating these patients, and only a portion of the assigned overhead. Thus, in the short run, capitated patients provide a positive economic benefit. Other payors' higher-acuity patients arrive more randomly, place greater strains on capacity, and generate higher overhead costs. This results in differential reimbursement to cover this incremental overhead. Having a portfolio of contracts allows the hospital to optimize capacity both in terms of patient flows and acuity. One risk of operating near capacity is that capitated patients could displace other higher-paying patients.

Physician impact on the total cost of care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Physicians' efforts at cost containment focus on decreased resource utilization and reduced length of stay. Although these efforts appear to be appropriate, little data exist to gauge their success. As such, the goal of this study is to determine trauma service cost allocations and how this information can help physicians to contain costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors analyzed the costs for 696 trauma admissions at a level I trauma center for fiscal year 1997. Data were obtained from the hospital costing system. Costs analyzed were variable direct, fixed direct, and Indirect costs. Together, the fixed and indirect costs are referred to as "hospital overhead." Total Cost equals variable direct plus fixed direct plus indirect costs. RESULTS: The mean variable, fixed, and indirect costs per patient were $7,998, $3,534, and $11,086, respectively. Mean total cost per patient was $22,618. CONCLUSION: The 35% variable direct cost represents the percentage of total cost that is typically under the immediate influence of physicians, in contrast to the 65% of total cost over which physicians have little control. Physicians must gain a better understanding of cost drivers and must participate in the operations and allocations of institutional fixed direct and indirect costs if the overall cost of care is to be reduced.

Posttraumatic stress disorder after injury: impact on general health outcome and early risk assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate prospectively components of general health outcome after trauma and to report on the further validation of the Michigan Critical Events Perception Scale (MCEPS), an instrument that predicts increased risk for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHODS: Adults without neurologic injury admitted to a Level I trauma center in 1997 were interviewed during hospitalization. Baseline data included demographics, injury mechanism, Injury Severity Score, the Short Form 36 (SF36), and the MCEPS, which measures peri-traumatic dissociation (the sense of depersonalization or derealization during an injury event). Surveys sent by mail and completed 6 months later included the SF36 and civilian Mississippi Scale for PTSD. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients were interviewed; the 70% (n = 100 patients) who completed the 6-month assessment form the study group. Injuries were categorized as 71% blunt, 13% penetrating, and 16% burn. Mean Injury Severity Score was 13.7+/-0.52. PTSD at 6 months occurred in 42% of the patients and was directly related to MCEPS dissociation (p = 0.001; odds ratio = 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.6, 5.9). A stepwise linear regression explains 40% of the variance in 6-month SF36 general health outcome (adjusted R2 = 0.402). The model controls for individual factors related to dissociation, PTSD, and general health outcome. Development of PTSD was independently and inversely related to general health outcome as measured by the SF36 at 6 months (p < 0.001, beta = -0.404). The R2 change of 0.132 for PTSD (vs. 0.082 for 6-month physical function) illustrates that PTSD contributes more to the patient's perceived general health at 6 months than the degree of physical function or injury severity. CONCLUSIONS: Within hours of injury, the MCEPS identifies patients who are three times more likely to develop PTSD. PTSD compromises self-reported general health outcome in injured adults independent of baseline status, Injury Severity Score, or degree of physical recovery. These data suggest that psychological morbidity is an important part of the patient's perceived general health.

Blunt thoracic aortic injury: delayed or early repair?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and benefit of delayed repair of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) in trauma patients with multiple injuries and to assess the financial impact of delayed repair. METHODS: A retrospective review of charts was performed on 55 patients with the diagnosis of BTAI from January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1997, at our Level I trauma center. Early repair was defined as operative repair of BTAI within 12 hours of admission. Seven patients were excluded from analysis due to death before BTAI diagnosis (two deaths were from rupture in the emergency department and five were from massive blunt trauma without rupture). The groups were compared by using a McNemar chi2 test, for which p less than or equal to 0.05 is significant. RESULTS: There were 30 patients in the early repair (ER) group repaired at 5.3+/-2.4 hours, and 18 patients in the delayed repair (DR) group repaired at 8.5 days (range, 17 hours-67 days). There were no significant differences between the ER and DR groups in age (37+/-18 years vs. 41+/-19 years), Injury Severity Score (39+/-15 vs. 45+/-14), intensive care unit days (12+/-14 days vs. 18+/-11 days), hospital length of stay (21+/-19 days vs. 28+/-14 days), or mortality rates (7% vs. 6%). There was a trend toward longer lengths of stay in the DR group. Most DR patients required beta-blocker therapy and/or other antihypertensives for systolic BP more than 120 mm Hg during admission. There were no deaths from aortic rupture in either group. By using financial data that was available from July of 1994 onward, we performed a subset analysis of the direct costs associated with BTAI. Total direct and variable direct costs for patients undergoing delayed repair were over two times the costs for early repair patients (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The management of trauma patients with multiple injuries requires prioritization of injuries so that the outcomes from these injuries can be optimized. Although delayed aortic repair was safely practiced in this series, there was not an obvious outcome benefit to delayed repair. The patients undergoing late repair required increased attention to hemodynamics, and there was a trend toward increased length of stay. In addition, analysis of the costs associated with delayed repair demonstrated a twofold increase in the direct costs for delayed repair compared with early repair.

Paying a premium: how patient complexity affects costs and profit margins.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Tertiary medical centers continue to be under extreme pressure to deliver high-complexity care, but paradoxically there is considerable pressure within these institutions to reduce their emphasis on tertiary care and refocus their efforts to develop a more community-like practice. The genesis of this pressure is the perceived profitability of routine surgical activity when compared with more complex care. The purpose of this study is to assess how the total cost and profit (loss) margin can vary for an entire trauma service. The authors also evaluate payments for specific trauma-related diagnostic-related groups (DRGs) and analyze how hospital margins were affected based on mortality outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors analyzed the actual cost of all trauma discharges (n = 692) at their level I trauma center for fiscal year 1997. Data were obtained from the trauma registry and the hospital cost accounting system. Total cost was defined as the sum of the variable, fixed, and indirect costs associated with each patient. Margin was defined as expected payments minus total cost. The entire population and all DRGs with 10 or more patients were stratified based on survival outcome, Injury Severity Score, insurance status, and length of stay. The mean total costs for survivors and nonsurvivors within these various categories and their margins were evaluated. RESULTS: The profit margin on nonsurvivors was $5,898 greater than for survivors, even though the mean total cost for nonsurvivors was $28,821 greater. Within the fixed fee arrangement, approximately 44% of transfers had a negative margin. Both survivors and nonsurvivors become increasingly profitable out to 20 days and subsequently become unprofitable beyond 21 days, but nonsurvivors were more profitable than survivors. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variance in both the costs and margins within trauma-related DRGs. The DRG payment system disproportionately reimburses providers for nonsurvivors, even though on average they are more costly. Because payers are likely to engage in portfolio management, patients can be transferred between hospitals based on the contractual relationship between the payer and the provider. This payment system potentially allows payers to act strategically, sending relatively low-cost patients to hospitals where they use fee-for-service reimbursement and high-cost patients to hospitals where their reimbursement is contractually capped. Although specific to the authors' trauma center and its payer mix, these data demonstrate the profitability of maintaining a level I trauma center and preserving the mission of delivering care to the severely injured.

Trauma services: a profit center?

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated inadequate reimbursement for severely injured patients with a resultant negative economic impact for the trauma service and hospital. The purpose of this study was to assess the total cost of care for all injured patients discharged from the trauma service in fiscal year 1997, and to determine the proportion of costs for the most severely injured on total cost. In addition, we assessed the total service costs and the revenue for treatment of the most severely ill. The final result was the determination of the profit (loss) margin for the entire service. STUDY DESIGN: All patients discharged from our Level I Trauma Center in fiscal year 1997 were included (n = 696). The population was then stratified into 2 subgroups using the Injury Severity Score (ISS). Patient grouping was facilitated by integration of the trauma registry with the hospital cost accounting system. The population was sub-divided into 2 distinct groups. Group A represented all patients with an ISS >15 (n = 192). Group B contained all patients with an ISS <15 (n = 504). Length of stay and mortality of each group was recorded. Cost of care was determined by the hospital cost accounting system TSI (Transition System Incorporated, Boston, MA), which is designed to generate cost center data on a cost per patient basis. Total costs were determined for the entire population and Groups A and B. The proportion of costs consumed by each group was then calculated. Reimbursement was determined by calculating expected payments for each patient. These calculations are based on previously agreed upon allowances from each insurer and are reconciled at the end of each fiscal year to ensure accuracy. RESULTS: The average length of stay for the population and Groups A and B were 7.5, 9.8, and 6.7 days respectively. Mortality in each group was 9.7%, 19.3%, and 6%. Over 92% of the population sustained blunt mechanism injury and only 8% were penetrating. When controlled for length of stay, the profit margin for Group A is $1,242/day and for Group B is $519/day. Comparison of mean cost/patient between Group A and Group B was $35,727 versus $17,623, respectively. CONCLUSION: Trauma centers can be profitable. Group A is responsible for 44% of the total service cost while accounting for only 28% of the discharges. Moreover, this group is responsible for 57% of the profit, and yields the greatest return. The ability to care for the sickest patients, while enormously costly, is essential to the economic viability of the trauma center and its future growth.

Trauma service cost: the real story.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to define and characterize the costs associated with trauma care at a level I trauma center. Once the costs were identified, attending physician-led teams were designed to reduce costs within each cost center. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The location and magnitude of the costs on a trauma service remain largely unknown. Focused cost-containment strategies remain difficult to implement because the expected return on these interventions is unknown. METHODS: Cost center data were reviewed for the 40 major DRGs admitted for the first 6 months of the fiscal years 1996 and 1997. Data were obtained from the hospital finance department using the Transition Systems Inc. accounting system. We focused on variable direct costs, those that vary with patient volume (e.g., staff nursing expense and medical/surgical supplies). To address issues of inflation, pay raises, and changing costs, a proxy value was created for 1996 and costs were held constant for the 1997 calculation. The major services that constitute cost centers identified in the system were nursing, surgical, pharmacy, laboratory, radiology, and emergency services. Attendings were assigned to develop and oversee customized cost-reduction modalities specific to each cost center. The cost-reduction modalities used to achieve significant savings were as follows: nursing, case management approach focusing on early discharge; surgical, meeting with operating room (OR) purchasing to modify expensive behavior patterns; pharmacy, integrating clinical pharmacist with direct attending support; laboratory, enforcing protocol for lab draws; radiology, increasing the use of emergency room ultrasound and accepting outside x-rays; and emergency services, 24-hour in-house attending staff to reduce emergency room time. The surgical and emergency services cost centers predominately generate costs by the length of time care is delivered in that area. RESULTS: For each period, data from 363 patients were compared. Mean length of stay decreased between the study periods from 8.72 to 7.06 days, while the average injury severity score was unchanged. Together, these cost centers constituted 87.4% of the total cost of care delivered. Significant cost reduction was achieved in all six variable cost centers: nursing (24%), surgical (5%), pharmacy (57%), laboratory (27), radiology (7%), and emergency (36). The mean cost per case was reduced by 25%. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of the true cost centers and directed attending surgeon involvement are essential to the development and implementation of a successful cost-reduction process.

Physician resource utilization after geriatric trauma.

OBJECTIVE: As health care resources become increasingly strained, the value of physician consultation has come under heightened scrutiny. This report reviews the value of early consultation by the physical medicine and rehabilitation (PMR) service to an integrated trauma service for geriatric patients with multiple trauma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 110 geriatric trauma patients (age > 60 years) with an Injury Severity Score > or = 15 to evaluate the effects of PMR consultation. Patients in group 1 were admitted to a general surgical service, and those in group 2 were admitted to a multidisciplinary trauma service. Demographic and physiologic factors, as well as short-term and long-term outcomes, were evaluated, and a subgroup analysis was performed to compare early (< or =3 days) versus late (>3 days) consultation by PMR. RESULTS: Although there were significant differences in Glasgow Coma Scale score and length of stay, no differences were found within groups in other demographic, physiologic, or outcome data. Focused review of PMR intervention based on early versus late consultation revealed no significant difference between the two groups. Furthermore, an after-discharge phone survey revealed no significant group differences in dependence on a care provider or nursing home placement, readmission to hospital, employment status, or current functional activity status. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term patient functional outcome and the in-house rehabilitation process are not affected by integration of PMR into a multidisciplinary trauma team or early PMR consultation.

Consequences of high-dose steroid therapy for acute spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: High-dose Solu-Medrol (Upjohn, Kalamazoo, Mich) therapy has become standard care in the management of acute spinal cord injury (ASCI). This study attempts to define the adverse effects that Solu-Medrol therapy has on these patients. DESIGN: Retrospective review with historical control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From May 1990 to April 1994, all patients with ASCI admitted within 8 hours of injury received high-dose Solu-Medrol per the National Acute Spinal Injury Study (NASCIS-2) protocol. Their demographic and outcome parameters were compared with those of a group admitted from March 1986 to December 1993 with an associated ASCI who received no steroid therapy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Steroid therapy was associated with a 2.6-fold increase in the incidence of pneumonia and an increase in ventilated and intensive care days. However, it was associated with a decrease in duration of rehabilitation and had no significant impact on other outcome parameters, including mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Although the NASCIS-2 protocol may promote early infectious complications, it has no adverse impact on long-term outcome in patients with ASCIs.

Blunt force injury of the abdominal aorta.

OBJECTIVE: To review the clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of injury to the abdominal aorta after blunt force trauma. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective review. RESULTS: A total of 5,676 patients were admitted to the University of Michigan Medical Center with traumatic injury. Seven had injuries to the abdominal aorta after a blunt force mechanism. Five patients had operative repair of the aortic injury, of which four involved orthotopic graft placement and one had an extra-anatomic bypass. Two patients had the aortic injury repaired by endovascular stent placement in the angiography suite. One patient died, and lower extremity amputations were performed in three patients. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical repair of abdominal aortic injury is preferable for the unstable patient or those with threatened extremities. In the stable patient with viable limbs, treatment with radiologic placement of endovascular stents may provide a nonoperative option for management.

Early placement of prophylactic vena caval filters in injured patients at high risk for pulmonary embolism.

OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major problem in patients with multiple injuries. We present our experience with early placement of prophylactic vena caval filters (VCFs). DESIGN: Prospective study group with historical control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 1993 to December 1993, VCFs were placed in 40 consecutive patients with three or more risk factors for PE and had demographic, physiologic, venous thromboembolic prophylaxis, and outcome data collected prospectively (VCF group). They were compared to 80 injured patients admitted between November 1991 and February 1993 who survived > 48 hours and who were matched with the VCF group for mechanism of injury and risk factors for PE (NO VCF group). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: VCF placement affected a significant reduction in the incidence of PE (2.5% vs. 17%) and a clinical reduction in PE-related mortality. Embolic trapping was suggested by a 10% incidence of documented vena caval thrombi and although two patients developed significant venous stasis disease, no other VCF-related morbidity was noted. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of long-term morbidity, early prophylactic VCF placement is safe and should be considered in the prophylaxis of PE in the high-risk injured patients. This intervention may be effective in eliminating PE as a major cause of posttrauma morbidity and mortality.

Prehospital classification combined with an in-hospital trauma radio system response reduces cost and duration of evaluation of the injured patient.

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to determine whether a prehospital trauma classification system (PHTCS) in combination with an in-hospital trauma radio system response (IHTRSR) impacts emergency care of the injured patient. METHODS: In 1991 our trauma center used no prehospital trauma classification system. A PHTCS was implemented in 1992, and in 1993 the PHTCS was integrated with an IHTRSR: RESULTS: Implementation of the PHTCS and IHTRSR resulted in a significant reduction in the time required for initial evaluation of the trauma patient with an associated reduction in cost. Reduction in time of the initial trauma evaluation was noted in both adult and pediatric populations, in patients with a blunt mechanism of injury, and in the injured patients posing the greatest strain to health care resources. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of a PHTCS with an IHTRSR has a significant impact on the cost and time of emergency treatment of the trauma victim with no adverse effect on patient outcome. Use of an integrated trauma response provides cost-effective and expeditious care of the injured patient and should be considered in trauma system development.

Pseudoaneurysms of the intraparenchymal splenic artery after blunt abdominal trauma: a complication of nonoperative therapy and its management.

The presentation, diagnosis, and successful management of posttraumatic pseudoaneurysms of the intraparenchymal splenic artery after nonoperative therapy in an adult patient is described. Pseudoaneurysm formation of the intraparenchymal splenic artery is a rare complication of traumatic splenic injury, which is a potential mechanism of delayed splenic rupture and demonstrates the importance of follow-up in the nonoperative therapy of blunt injury to the spleen.

Biliary tract injury following blunt abdominal trauma: case reports.

This report reviews three cases of biliary tract injury following blunt abdominal trauma. During diagnostic evaluation, computerized tomography failed to delineate the injuries, but endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) aided in the diagnosis in two patients and pre-operative biliary stent placement facilitated operative intervention. Surgical exploration was required to fully characterize the injury in all three patients.