Disparity in Risk of Readmission in Adult Burn Patients: Analysis of a Nationwide Readmission Database.

INTRODUCTION: Burn injuries remain a significant cause of disability, impacting long term quality-of-life and imposing large costs on our health systems. Readmission is a metric of quality and an important contributor to this economic burden. The association of socioeconomic and insurance status with burn readmission is not well established. The aim of our study is to develop a predictive risk model of factors associated with readmission after burns. METHODS: Using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's 2018 Nationwide Readmission Database, we identified patients ≥18 y of age with burns admitted between January and October 2018. We excluded patients who died during index admission. Our primary outcome was readmission within 60 d postdischarge. We performed a Lasso regression analysis with adaptive selection to generate a predictive model with least deviance using patients' demographics and socioeconomic status, burn location and severity, past medical history, and hospital characteristics. Weighted multiple logistic regression was performed to obtain population estimates of adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of each element in the model. RESULTS: Our cohort included 11,380 burn patients. Of those, 1625 (14.3%) were readmitted and 67% were males. Readmitted patients were older (55 ± 17 versus 49 ± 18, P = 0.0001). Weighted logistic regression for the selected model showed higher odds of readmission for patients with lowest income quartile (OR: 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.36), Medicare or Medicaid insurance (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.17-1.55), history of psychiatric illness (OR:1.19, 95% CI: 1.02-1.39), diabetes (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.25-1.69), chronic kidney disease (OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.30-2.11), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 1.55, 95% CI:1.26-1.89), and alcohol use disorder (OR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.13-1.58). Third degree burns and foot burns had higher OR of readmission (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.38-1.98 and 1.66, 95% CI: 1.02-1.45, respectively), while face and hand burns had lower OR of readmission (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66-0.90 and 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-0.98, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Burn readmissions are multifactorial and directly related to the patient's comorbidities, including markers that reflect barriers to care such as socioeconomic characteristics, as well as the anatomical location of burn injuries. Early identification of these high-risk patients may aid in early intervention, resource allocation, and outreach program development in an attempt to reduce readmission rates and improve outcomes. Future prospective validation of these risk factors is warranted.

Respiratory Variation in Carotid Artery Peak Systolic Velocity Is Unable to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in Spontaneously Breathing Critically Ill Patients When Assessed by Novice Physician Sonologists.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory variation in carotid artery peak systolic velocity (ΔVpeak) assessed by point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been proposed as a noninvasive means to predict fluid responsiveness. We aimed to evaluate the ability of carotid ΔVpeak as assessed by novice physician sonologists to predict fluid responsiveness. METHODS: This study was conducted in 2 intensive care units. Spontaneously breathing, nonintubated patients with signs of volume depletion were included. Patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter, cardiogenic, obstructive or neurogenic shock, or those for whom further intravenous (IV) fluid administration would be harmful were excluded. Three novice physician sonologists were trained in POCUS assessment of carotid ΔVpeak. They assessed the carotid ΔVpeak in study participants prior to the administration of a 500 mL IV fluid bolus. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a ≥10% increase in cardiac index as measured using bioreactance. RESULTS: Eighty-six participants were enrolled, 50 (58.1%) were fluid responders. Carotid ΔVpeak performed poorly at predicting fluid responsiveness. Test characteristics for the optimum carotid ΔVpeak of 8.0% were: area under the receiver operating curve = 0.61 (95% CI: 0.48-0.73), sensitivity = 72.0% (95% CI: 58.3-82.56), specificity = 50.0% (95% CI: 34.5-65.5). CONCLUSIONS: Novice physician sonologists using POCUS are unable to predict fluid responsiveness using carotid ΔVpeak. Until further research identifies key limiting factors, clinicians should use caution directing IV fluid resuscitation using carotid ΔVpeak.

Change in Carotid Blood Flow and Carotid Corrected Flow Time Assessed by Novice Sonologists Fails to Determine Fluid Responsiveness in Spontaneously Breathing Intensive Care Unit Patients.

Measurement of carotid blood flow (CBF) and corrected carotid flow time (ccFT) has been proposed as a non-invasive means of determining fluid responsiveness. We evaluated the ability of CBF and ccFT as assessed by novice sonologists to determine fluid responsiveness in intensive care unit patients. Three novice physician sonologists performed carotid ultrasounds before and after a fluid bolus and calculated changes in CBF and ccFT. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a ≥10% increase in cardiac index as measured using bioreactance. Of 112 participants, 56 (50%) were fluid responders. Changes in CBF and ccFT performed poorly at determining fluid responsiveness: 19 mL/min (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.58, 95% confidence interval: 0.47-0.68) and 6 ms (0.59, 0.46-0.65) respectively. Novice physician sonologists are unable to determine fluid responsiveness using CBF or ccFT. Further research is needed to identify the key limiting factors in using carotid ultrasound to determine fluid responsiveness.

Performance of a 25% Inferior Vena Cava Collapsibility in Detecting Fluid Responsiveness When Assessed by Novice Versus Expert Physician Sonologists.

OBJECTIVES: Inferior vena cava collapsibility (cIVC) measured by point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been proposed as a noninvasive means of assessing fluid responsiveness. We aimed to prospectively evaluate the performance of a 25% cIVC cutoff value to detect fluid responsiveness among spontaneously breathing intensive care unit (ICU) patients when assessed with POCUS by novice versus expert physician sonologists. METHODS: Prospective observational study of spontaneously breathing ICU patients. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a >10% increase in cardiac index following a 500 mL fluid bolus, measured by bioreactance. Novice sonologist measured cIVC with POCUS. Their measurements were later compared to an expert physician sonologist who independently reviewed the POCUS images and assessed cIVCs. RESULTS: Of the 85 participants, 44 (52%) were fluid responders. A 25% cIVC cutoff value performed better when assessed by expert sonologists than novice physician sonologists (receiver-operator characteristic curve, ROC = 0.82 [0.74-0.88] vs ROC = 0.69 [0.60-0.77]). CONCLUSIONS: A 25% cIVC cutoff value measured by POCUS detects fluid responsiveness. However, the experience of the physician sonologist affects test performance and should be considered when interpreting and clinically using cIVC to direct intravenous fluid resuscitation.