Literature DB >> 33605705

Variation in neurosurgical intervention for severe traumatic brain injury: The challenge of measuring quality in trauma center verification.

Evelyn I Truong1, Samuel P Stanley, Belinda S DeMario, Esther S Tseng, John J Como, Vanessa P Ho, Michael L Kelly.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intracranial pressure monitor (ICPm) procedure rates are a quality metric for American College of Surgeons trauma center verification. However, ICPm procedure rates may not accurately reflect the quality of care in TBI. We hypothesized that ICPm and craniotomy/craniectomy procedure rates for severe TBI vary across the United States by geography and institution.
METHODS: We identified all patients with a severe traumatic brain injury (head Abbreviated Injury Scale, ≥3) from the 2016 Trauma Quality Improvement Program data set. Patients who received surgical decompression or ICPm were identified via International Classification of Diseases codes. Hospital factors included neurosurgeon group size, geographic region, teaching status, and trauma center level. Two multiple logistic regression models were performed identifying factors associated with (1) craniotomy with or without ICPm or (2) ICPm alone. Data are presented as medians (interquartile range) and odds ratios (ORs) (95% confidence interval).
RESULTS: We identified 75,690 patients (66.4% male; age, 59 [36-77] years) with a median Injury Severity Score of 17 (11-25). Overall, 6.1% had surgical decompression, and 4.8% had ICPm placement. Logistic regression analysis showed that region of the country was significantly associated with procedure type: hospitals in the West were more likely to use ICPm (OR, 1.34 [1.20-1.50]), while Northeastern (OR, 0.80 [0.72-0.89]), Southern (OR, 0.84 [0.78-0.92]), and Western (OR, 0.88 [0.80-0.96]) hospitals were less likely to perform surgical decompression. Hospitals with small neurosurgeon groups (<3) were more likely to perform surgical intervention. Community hospitals are associated with higher odds of surgical decompression but lower odds of ICPm placement.
CONCLUSION: Both geographic differences and hospital characteristics are independent predictors for surgical intervention in severe traumatic brain injury. This suggests that nonpatient factors drive procedural decisions, indicating that ICPm rate is not an ideal quality metric for American College of Surgeons trauma center verification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level III; Care management/Therapeutic level III.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33605705      PMCID: PMC8505004          DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000003114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg        ISSN: 2163-0755            Impact factor:   3.697


  37 in total

1.  Brain Trauma Foundation Guidelines for Intracranial Pressure Monitoring: Compliance and Effect on Outcome.

Authors:  Alberto Aiolfi; Elizabeth Benjamin; Desmond Khor; Kenji Inaba; Lydia Lam; Demetrios Demetriades
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Trial of Decompressive Craniectomy for Traumatic Intracranial Hypertension.

Authors:  Peter J Hutchinson; Angelos G Kolias; Ivan S Timofeev; Elizabeth A Corteen; Marek Czosnyka; Jake Timothy; Ian Anderson; Diederik O Bulters; Antonio Belli; C Andrew Eynon; John Wadley; A David Mendelow; Patrick M Mitchell; Mark H Wilson; Giles Critchley; Juan Sahuquillo; Andreas Unterberg; Franco Servadei; Graham M Teasdale; John D Pickard; David K Menon; Gordon D Murray; Peter J Kirkpatrick
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Randall M Chesnut; Nancy Temkin; Nancy Carney; Sureyya Dikmen; Carlos Rondina; Walter Videtta; Gustavo Petroni; Silvia Lujan; Jim Pridgeon; Jason Barber; Joan Machamer; Kelley Chaddock; Juanita M Celix; Marianna Cherner; Terence Hendrix
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  National variation in outcomes and costs for splenic injury and the impact of trauma systems: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Christian A Hamlat; Saman Arbabi; Thomas D Koepsell; Ronald V Maier; Gregory J Jurkovich; Frederick P Rivara
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 5.  Understanding of regional variation in the use of surgery.

Authors:  John D Birkmeyer; Bradley N Reames; Peter McCulloch; Andrew J Carr; W Bruce Campbell; John E Wennberg
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-09-28       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Decreased mortality in traumatic brain injury following regionalization across hospital systems.

Authors:  Michael L Kelly; Aman Banerjee; Michael Nowak; Michael Steinmetz; Jeffrey A Claridge
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.313

7.  Trauma quality improvement using risk-adjusted outcomes.

Authors:  Shahid Shafi; Avery B Nathens; Jennifer Parks; Henry M Cryer; John J Fildes; Larry M Gentilello
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2008-03

8.  Functional and long-term outcomes in severe traumatic brain injury following regionalization of a trauma system.

Authors:  Michael L Kelly; Mary Jo Roach; Aman Banerjee; Michael P Steinmetz; Jeffrey A Claridge
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.313

9.  Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: Evaluation of the effects at one year.

Authors:  Jacques Albanèse; Marc Leone; Jean-Roch Alliez; Jean-Marc Kaya; François Antonini; Bernard Alliez; Claude Martin
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 7.598

10.  Correction to: Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study.

Authors:  Thomas A van Essen; Hugo F den Boogert; Maryse C Cnossen; Godard C W de Ruiter; Iain Haitsma; Suzanne Polinder; Ewout W Steyerberg; David Menon; Andrew I R Maas; Hester F Lingsma; Wilco C Peul
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.216

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.