The Importance of Safety-Net Hospitals in Emergency General Surgery

Hospital Location and Socioeconomic Disadvantage of Emergency General Surgery Patients

BACKGROUND

Emergency general surgery (EGS) patients are more socioeconomically vulnerable than elective counterparts. We hypothesized that a hospital's neighborhood disadvantage is associated with vulnerability of its EGS patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Area deprivation index (ADI), a neighborhood-level measure of disadvantage, and key characteristics of 724 hospitals in 14 states were linked to patient-level data in State Inpatient Databases. Hospital and EGS patient characteristics were compared across hospital ADI quartiles (least disadvantaged [ADI 1-25] "affluent," minimally disadvantaged [ADI 26-50] "min-da", moderately disadvantaged [ADI 51-75] "mod-da", and most disadvantaged [ADI 76-100] "impoverished") using chi² tests and multivariable regression.

RESULTS

Higher disadvantage hospitals are more often nonteaching (affluent = 38.9%, min-da = 53.5%, mod-da = 72.1%, and impoverished = 67.6%), nonaffiliated with medical schools (50%, 72.4%, 81.8%, and 78.8%), and in rural areas (3.3%, 9.2%, 31.2%, and 27.9%). EGS patients at higher disadvantage hospitals are more likely to be older (43.9%, 48.6%, 49.1%, and 46.6%), have >3 comorbidities (17.0%, 19.0%, 18.4%, and 19.3%), live in low-income areas (21.4%, 23.6%, 32.2%, and 42.5%), and experience complications (23.2%, 23.7%, 24.0%, and 25.2%). Rates of uninsurance/underinsurance were highest at affluent and impoverished hospitals (18.0, 16.4%, 17.7%, and 19.2%). Higher disadvantage hospitals serve fewer minorities (32.6%, 21.3%, 20.7%, and 24.0%), except in rural areas (2.9%, 6.7%, 6.5%, and 15.5%). In multivariable analyses, the impoverished hospital ADI quartile did not predict odds of serving as a safety-net or predominantly minority-serving hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals in impoverished areas disproportionately serve underserved EGS patient populations but are less likely to have robust resources for EGS care or train future EGS surgeons. These findings have implications for measures to improve equity in EGS outcomes.

Do safety-net hospitals provide equitable care after decompressive surgery for acute cauda equina syndrome?

INTRODUCTION

Safety-net hospitals provide care to a substantial share of disadvantaged patient populations. Whether disparities exist between safety-net hospitals and their counterparts in performing emergent neurosurgical procedures has not yet been examined.

OBJECTIVE

We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), a national all-payer inpatient healthcare database, to determine whether safety-net hospitals provide equitable care after decompressive surgery for acute cauda equina syndrome (CES).

METHODS

The NIS from 2002 to 2011 was queried for patients with a diagnosis of acute CES who received decompressive surgery. Hospital safety-net burden was designated as low (LBH), medium (MBH), or high (HBH) based on the proportion of inpatient admissions that were billed as Medicaid, self-pay, or charity care. Etiologies of CES were classified as degenerative, neoplastic, trauma, and infectious. Significance was defined at p < 0.01.

RESULTS

A total of 5607 admissions were included in this analysis. HBHs were more likely than LBHs to treat patients who were Black, Hispanic, on Medicaid, or had a traumatic CES etiology (p < 0.001). After adjusting for patient, hospital, and clinical factors treatment at an HBH was not associated with greater inpatient adverse events (p = 0.611) or LOS (p = 0.082), but was associated with greater inflation-adjusted admission cost (p = 0.001).

DISCUSSION

Emergent decompressive surgery for CES performed at SNHs is associated with greater inpatient costs, but not greater inpatient adverse events or LOS. Differences in workflows at SNHs may be the drivers of these disparities in cost and warrant further investigation.

Geographic Variation in Appendiceal Perforation Rates in Canada: a Population-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that patients living in rural neighborhoods experience delayed access to surgical services manifesting in increased appendiceal perforation rates in cases of appendicitis.

METHODS

This population-based cohort study included adult patients with acute appendicitis in Canada (excluding Quebec) between April 2008 and March 2015. The main outcome of interest was rate of perforation. Predictors of interest included socioeconomic, geographic, and individual predictors of perforation. Spatial analysis was used to analyze spatial clustering of perforation.

RESULTS

We identified 143,195 patients throughout the course of the study. The average perforation rate across our study was 35.9% (n = 51,456). Cluster analysis identified 286 (24%) neighborhoods with perforation rates greater than the average. Rural neighborhoods had a 1.89 times higher odds of being in a high perforation cluster (95% CI 1.08-3.08, p = 0.024). Compared to neighborhoods > 75 km from the admitting hospital, closer neighborhoods were less likely to be in a high perforation cluster (0-35 km OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.38-0.98, p = 0.049; 36-75 km OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.92, p = 0.019). Patients admitted to small community hospitals had a 0.51 times lower odds of perforation than those admitted to academic centers (95% CI 0.47-0.54, p < 0.001) and those who lived in high perforation clusters had a 1.42 times higher odds of perforation (95% CI 1.39-1.46, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Neighborhoods located far from hospitals have increased appendiceal perforation rates. Also, patients with appendicitis treated at small community hospitals have significantly lower odds of perforation. From a policy point of view, patients with symptoms of appendicitis can be safely treated at the nearest hospital.

How Safe Are Safety-Net Hospitals? Opportunities to Improve Outcomes for Vulnerable Patients Undergoing Hepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Safety-net hospitals are critical to the US health system as they provide care to vulnerable patients. The effect of hospital safety-net burden on patient outcomes in hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgery was examined.

METHODS

Discharge data between 2004 and 2014 from the National Inpatient Sample were utilized. Hospitals with a safety-net burden were divided into tertiles: low (LBH) (< 13.6%), medium (MBH) (13.6-33.3%), and high (HBH) (> 33.3%). The association of hospital safety-net burden with complications, in-hospital mortality, never events, and costs were defined.

RESULTS

Nearly 5% of the analytic cohort (n = 65,032) had surgery at a HBH. Patients treated at HBH were younger (median age, HBH 55 years vs LBH 62 years; p < 0.001), black or Hispanic (HBH 40.5% vs LBH 12.7%; p < 0.001), and of lowest income quartile (HBH 38.4% vs LBH 19.6%; p < 0.001). One-third of patients at HBH experienced a complication compared with only a quarter of patients at LBH (p < 0.001). HBH had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (HBH 6.5% vs. LBH 2.8%; p < 0.001), never events (HBH 5.4% vs. LBH 1.4%; p < 0.001), and a higher cost of surgery (HBH $30,716 vs. LBH $28,054; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative outcomes were worse at HBH, highlighting that efforts are needed to improve their delivery of care.

Identifying the fundamental structures and processes of care contributing to emergency general surgery quality using a mixed-methods Donabedian approach

BACKGROUND

Acute Care Surgery (ACS) was developed as a structured, team-based approach to providing round-the-clock emergency general surgery (EGS) care for adult patients needing treatment for diseases such as cholecystitis, gastrointestinal perforation, and necrotizing fasciitis. Lacking any prior evidence on optimizing outcomes for EGS patients, current implementation of ACS models has been idiosyncratic. We sought to use a Donabedian approach to elucidate potential EGS structures and processes that might be associated with improved outcomes as an initial step in designing the optimal model of ACS care for EGS patients.

METHODS

We developed and implemented a national survey of hospital-level EGS structures and processes by surveying surgeons or chief medical officers regarding hospital-level structures and processes that directly or indirectly impacted EGS care delivery in 2015. These responses were then anonymously linked to 2015 data from the American Hospital Association (AHA) annual survey, Medicare Provider Analysis and Review claims (MedPAR), 17 State Inpatient Databases (SIDs) using AHA unique identifiers (AHAID). This allowed us to combine hospital-level data, as reported in our survey or to the AHA, to patient-level data in an effort to further examine the role of EGS structures and processes on EGS outcomes. We describe the multi-step, iterative process utilizing the Donabedian framework for quality measurement that serves as a foundation for later work in this project.

RESULTS

Hospitals that responded to the survey were primarily non-governmental and located in urban settings. A plurality of respondent hospitals had fewer than 100 inpatient beds. A minority of the hospitals had medical school affiliations.

DISCUSSION

Our results will enable us to develop a measure of preparedness for delivering EGS care in the US, provide guidance for regionalized care models for EGS care, tiering of ACS programs based on the robustness of their EGS structures and processes and the quality of their outcomes, and formulate triage guidelines based on patient risk factors and severity of EGS disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Our work provides a template for team science applicable to research efforts combining primary data collection (i.e., that derived from our survey) with existing national data sources (i.e., SIDs and MedPAR).

Hospital-Level Medicaid Prevalence Is Associated with Increased Length of Stay after Asymptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy and Stenting Despite no Increase in Major Complications

BACKGROUND

Length of stay (LOS) after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) for asymptomatic disease is used as a quality measure and affects hospital operating margins. Patient-level Medicaid status has traditionally been associated with longer hospital LOS. Our goal was to assess the association between hospital-level Medicaid prevalence and postoperative LOS after CEA and CAS.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was queried from 2006-2014 for CEA and CAS performed for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Overall hospital-level Medicaid prevalence was divided into quartiles. The quartiles were further categorized into low Medicaid prevalence (LM) (lowest quartile), medium Medicaid prevalence (MM) (second and third quartiles), and high Medicaid prevalence (HM) (fourth quartile) cohorts. The primary outcome evaluated was postoperative LOS >1 day. The secondary outcomes included perioperative/in-hospital complications and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 984,283 patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis who underwent CEA (88%) or CAS (12%). Mean postoperative LOS after CEA at hospitals with LM, MM, and HM prevalence was 1.4 ± 1.5, 2.1 ± 2.5, and 2.2 ± 2.8 days (P = 0.0001), respectively, and after CAS were 1.7 ± 2.6, 1.8 ± 2.1, and 2 ± 2.6 days (P < 0.0001), respectively. After CEA, relative to LM prevalence, MM (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.17-2.24) and HM (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.2-2.28) prevalence were associated with a higher likelihood of LOS > 1 day (P = 0.009). After CAS, relative to LM prevalence, HM prevalence was associated with a higher likelihood of LOS >1 day (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.06-1.91) (P = 0.003). After CEA, neurologic (0.8% vs. 0.9% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.83) and cardiac complications (0.9% vs. 1.2% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.24) were similar among hospitals with LM, MM, and HM prevalence, respectively. After CAS, the prevalence of neurological (1.1% vs. 1% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.42) and cardiac complications (2% vs. 1.3% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.46) were also similar. After both CEA and CAS, mortality was similar among Medicaid prevalence cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher hospital-level Medicaid prevalence was associated with longer LOS after CEA and CAS for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Value-based payment models should adjust for hospital-level Medicaid prevalence to appropriately reimburse providers and hospital with higher Medicaid prevalence as well as investigate care pathways and systems improvement to help reduce LOS.

Social determinants of health and outcomes of ventral hernia repair in a safety-net hospital setting

PURPOSE

Lower socioeconomic status has been shown to be predictive of poorer surgical outcomes in ventral hernia repair. Recently, safety-net hospitals have been attempting to address these disparities to improve the care of patients of lower socioeconomic status.

METHODS

A query of all patients undergoing ventral hernia repair at our institution between 2010 and 2019 was completed (n = 580). Patients not from identifiable New Jersey ZIP-codes were excluded (n = 572). ZIP codes were assigned quartiles based off socioeconomic variables including median household income, percent below poverty line, and high school graduation rate. Patients were then assigned to socioeconomic status quartiles based off their residential ZIP-code. Outcomes of ventral hernia surgery were compared across ZIP-code quartiles. Logistic regression was used to analyze predictors of poor outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients from lower socioeconomic brackets were more likely to be younger (p < 0.001), female (p = 0.014), black (p < 0.001), and/or Hispanic (p = 0.003). Most notably, outcomes of ventral hernia were not significantly different between patients of different socioeconomic status ZIP-code quartiles. The risk of any post-operative morbidity was higher for longer procedures (p < 0.001) and for hernia repairs being done with other procedures (p < 0.001). Risk of prolonged length of stay and related 30-day readmission was higher with longer procedures (p < 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

We found that outcomes of ventral hernia repair at a safety-net hospital were unaffected by socioeconomic status. This supports the important role that safety-net institutions play in providing quality care to their vulnerable populations. Future studies at other safety-net hospitals should be done to further assess the updated impact of socioeconomic status on ventral hernia outcomes.

Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis: Do Medicaid and Non-Medicaid Enrolled Patients Receive the Same Care?

BACKGROUND

Nationally, Medicaid enrollees with emergency surgical conditions experience worse outcomes overall when compared with privately insured patients. The goal of this study is to investigate disparities in the treatment of cholecystitis based on insurance type and to identify contributing factors.

METHODS

Adults with cholecystitis at a safety-net hospital in Central Massachusetts from 2017-2018 were included. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were compared based on Medicaid enrollment status (Medicare excluded). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the frequency of surgery, time to surgery (TTS), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates between groups.

RESULTS

The sample (n = 203) included 69 Medicaid enrollees (34%), with a mean age of 44.4 years. Medicaid enrollees were younger (p = 0.0006), had lower levels of formal education (high school diploma attainment, p < 0.0001), were more likely to be unmarried (p < 0.0001), Non-White (p = 0.0012), and require an interpreter (p < 0.0001). Patients in both groups experienced similar rates of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, TTS, and LOS; however, Medicaid enrollees experienced more readmissions within 30 days of discharge (30.4% vs 17.9%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Despite anticipated population differences, the treatment of acute cholecystitis was similar between Medicaid and Non-Medicaid enrollees, with the exception of readmission. Further research is needed to identify patient, provider, and/or population factors driving this disparity.