Literature DB >> 32456785

Effect of Transfer Status on Outcomes of Emergency General Surgery Patients.

Jennifer L Philip1, Dou-Yan Yang1, Xing Wang1, Sara Fernandes-Taylor1, Bret M Hanlon1, Jessica Schumacher1, Megan C Saucke1, Jeffrey Havlena1, Heena P Santry2, Angela M Ingraham3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Transferred emergency general surgery (EGS) patients are a vulnerable, high acuity population. The outcomes of and health care utilization among transferred (TRAN) as compared to directly admitted (DA) patients have been studied primarily using single institution or hospital system data which limits generalizability. We evaluated these outcomes among EGS patients using a national database.
METHODS: We identified encounters of patients aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of EGS as defined by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in the 2008-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Multivariable regression analyses determined if transfer status independently predicted in-hospital mortality (logistic regression) and morbidity (presence of any complication among those who survived to discharge; logistic regression), cost (log-linear regression), and duration of stay (among those who survived to discharge; log-linear regression) accounting for the NIS sampling design.
RESULTS: We identified 274,145 TRAN (57,885 unweighted) and 10,456,100 DA (2,187,132 unweighted) encounters. On univariate analysis, TRAN patients were more likely to have greater comorbidity scores, have Medicare insurance, and reside in an area with a lesser median household income compared to DA patients (p<0.0001). Mortality was greater in the TRAN vs DA groups (4.4% vs 1.6%; p<0.0001). Morbidity (presence of any complication) was also greater among TRAN patients (38.8% vs 26.1%; p<0.0001). Morbidity among TRAN patients was primarily due to urinary- (13.7%), gastrointestinal- (12.9%), and pulmonary-related (13.3%) complications. Median duration of hospital stay was 4.3 days for TRAN vs 3.0 days for DA (p<0.0001) patients. Median cost was greater for TRAN patients ($8,935 vs $7,167; p<0.0001). Regression analyses determined that after adjustment, TRAN patients had statistically significantly greater mortality, morbidity, and cost as well as longer durations of stay.
CONCLUSIONS: EGS patients who are transferred experience increased in-hospital morbidity and mortality as well as increased durations of stay and cost. As the population and age of patients diagnosed with EGS conditions increase while the EGS workforce decreases, the need for inter-hospital transfers will increase. Identifying risk factors associated with worse outcomes among transferred patients can inform the design of initiatives in performance improvement and direct the finite resources available to this vulnerable patient population.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32456785      PMCID: PMC7390656          DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.01.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  47 in total

1.  Laparoscopic vs open colectomy for colon cancer: results from a large nationwide population-based analysis.

Authors:  Scott R Steele; Tommy A Brown; Robert M Rush; Matthew J Martin
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-09-07       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  The importance of the first complication: understanding failure to rescue after emergent surgery in the elderly.

Authors:  Kyle H Sheetz; Robert W Krell; Michael J Englesbe; John D Birkmeyer; Darrell A Campbell; Amir A Ghaferi
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Factors Associated With the Interhospital Transfer of Emergency General Surgery Patients.

Authors:  Angela Ingraham; Xing Wang; Jeffrey Havlena; Bret Hanlon; Megan Saucke; Jessica Schumacher; Sara Fernandes-Taylor; Caprice Greenberg
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 4.  Practical Guide to Surgical Data Sets: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample (NIS).

Authors:  Jonah J Stulberg; Elliott R Haut
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 14.766

5.  Patient Safety Indicators: using administrative data to identify potential patient safety concerns.

Authors:  M R Miller; A Elixhauser; C Zhan; G S Meyer
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  Expanding the scope of quality measurement in surgery to include nonoperative care: Results from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program emergency general surgery pilot.

Authors:  Michael W Wandling; Clifford Y Ko; Paul E Bankey; Chris Cribari; H Gill Cryer; Jose J Diaz; Therese M Duane; S Morad Hameed; Matthew M Hutter; Michael H Metzler; Justin L Regner; Patrick M Reilly; H David Reines; Jason L Sperry; Kristan L Staudenmayer; Garth H Utter; Marie L Crandall; Karl Y Bilimoria; Avery B Nathens
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.313

7.  A longitudinal analysis of the general surgery workforce in the United States, 1981-2005.

Authors:  Dana Christian Lynge; Eric H Larson; Matthew J Thompson; Roger A Rosenblatt; L Gary Hart
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2008-04

8.  Interhospital transfer for emergency general surgery: An independent predictor of mortality.

Authors:  Sam Yelverton; Nigel Rozario; Brent D Matthews; Caroline E Reinke
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2018-08-15       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Interhospital transfer for acute surgical care: does delay matter?

Authors:  Kristy Kummerow Broman; Rachel M Hayes; Sunil Kripalani; Eduard E Vasilevskis; Sharon E Phillips; Jesse M Ehrenfeld; Michael D Holzman; Kenneth W Sharp; Richard A Pierce; William H Nealon; Benjamin K Poulose
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Characteristics and Timing of Interhospital Transfers of Emergency General Surgery Patients.

Authors:  Jennifer L Philip; Megan C Saucke; Jessica R Schumacher; Sara Fernandes-Taylor; Jeffrey Havlena; Caprice C Greenberg; Angela M Ingraham
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 2.417

View more
  5 in total

1.  Communication During Interhospital Transfers of Emergency General Surgery Patients: A Qualitative Study of Challenges and Opportunities.

Authors:  Esra Alagoz; Megan Saucke; Natalia Arroyo; Sara Fernandez Taylor; Angela Ingraham
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 2.243

Review 2.  Interhospital transfer (IHT) in emergency general surgery patients (EGS): A scoping review.

Authors:  Ryan D Emanuelson; Sarah J Brown; Paula M Termuhlen
Journal:  Surg Open Sci       Date:  2022-05-21

3.  Factors associated with potentially avoidable interhospital transfers in emergency general surgery-A call for quality improvement efforts.

Authors:  Cindy Y Teng; Billie S Davis; Jeremy M Kahn; Matthew R Rosengart; Joshua B Brown
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 3.982

4.  Assessment of Hospital Characteristics and Interhospital Transfer Patterns of Adults With Emergency General Surgery Conditions.

Authors:  Cindy Y Teng; Billie S Davis; Matthew R Rosengart; Kathleen M Carley; Jeremy M Kahn
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-09-01

5.  Comparing Outcomes between Major Trauma Patients Transferred from a Different Hospital and Patients Transported Directly to Trauma Centers: A Retrospective Analysis with Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Authors:  Cheng-Hsi Yeh; Sheng-En Chou; Wei-Ti Su; Ching-Hua Tsai; Chun-Ying Huang; Shiun-Yuan Hsu; Ching-Hua Hsieh
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 1.621

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.