Hospitals That Serve Many Black Patients Have Lower Revenues and Profits: Structural Racism in Hospital Financing

Trends in C-Reactive Protein Use in Early-onset Sepsis Evaluations and Associated Antibiotic Use

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of C-reactive protein (CRP) use in early-onset sepsis (EOS) evaluations in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) across the US over time and to determine the association between CRP use and antibiotic use.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of NICUs contributing data to Premier Healthcare Database from 2009 through 2021. EOS evaluation was defined as a blood culture charge ≤ 3 days after birth. CRP use for each NICU was calculated as the proportion of infants with a CRP test obtained ≤ 3 days after birth among those undergoing an EOS evaluation and categorized as, low (<25%); medium-low (25 to < 50%), medium-high (50 to < 75%), and high (≥75%). Outcomes included antibiotic use and mortality ≤ 7 days after birth.

RESULTS

Among 572 NICUs, CRP use varied widely and was associated with time. The proportion of NICUs with high CRP use decreased from 2009 to 2021 (24.7% vs 17.4%, P < .001), and those with low CRP use increased (47.9% vs 64.8%, P < .001). Compared with low-use NICUs, high-use NICUs more frequently continued antibiotics > 3 days (10% vs 25%, P < .001). This association persisted in multivariable-adjusted regression analyses (adjusted risk ratio 1.95, 95%CI 1.54, 2.48). Risk of mortality was not different in high-use NICUs (adjusted risk difference -0.02%, 95%CI -0.04%, 0.0008%).

CONCLUSIONS

CRP use in EOS evaluations varied widely across NICUs. High CRP use was associated with prolonged antibiotic therapy but not mortality ≤ 7 days after birth. Reducing routine CRP use in EOS evaluations may be a target for neonatal antibiotic stewardship efforts.

Health-care organization characteristics in cancer care delivery: an integrated conceptual framework with content validation

Context can influence cancer-related outcomes. For example, health-care organization characteristics, including ownership, leadership, and culture, can affect care access, communication, and patient outcomes. Health-care organization characteristics and other contextual factors can also influence whether and how clinical discoveries reduce cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality. Importantly, policy, market, and technology changes are transforming health-care organization design, culture, and operations across the cancer continuum. Consequently, research is essential to examine when, for whom, and how organizational characteristics influence person-level, organization-level, and population-level cancer outcomes. Understanding organizational characteristics-the structures, processes, and other features of entities involved in health care delivery-and their dynamics is an important yet understudied area of care delivery research across the cancer continuum. Research incorporating organizational characteristics is critical to address health inequities, test care delivery models, adapt interventions, and strengthen implementation. The field lacks conceptual grounding, however, to help researchers identify germane organizational characteristics. We propose a framework identifying organizational characteristics relevant for cancer care delivery research based on conceptual work in health services, organizational behavior, and management science and refined using a systematic review and key informant input. The proposed framework is a tool for organizing existing research and enhancing future cancer care delivery research. Following a 2012 Journal of the National Cancer Institute monograph, this work complements National Cancer Institute efforts to stimulate research addressing the relationship between cancer outcomes and contextual factors at the patient, provider, team, delivery organization, community, and health policy levels.

Association of geographical disparities and segregation in regional treatment facilities for Black patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in the United States

Background and objectives

This study investigates geographic disparities in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) care for Black patients and aims to explore the association with segregation in treatment facilities. Understanding these dynamics can guide efforts to improve healthcare outcomes for marginalized populations.

Methods

This cohort study evaluated regional differences in segregation for Black patients with aSAH and the association with geographic variations in disparities from 2016 to 2020. The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried for admission data on aSAH. Black patients were compared to White patients. Segregation in treatment facilities was calculated using the dissimilarity (D) index. Using multivariable logistic regression models, the regional disparities in aSAH treatment, functional outcomes, mortality, and end-of-life care between Black and White patients and the association of geographical segregation in treatment facilities was assessed.

Results

142,285 Black and White patients were diagnosed with aSAH from 2016 to 2020. The Pacific division (D index = 0.55) had the greatest degree of segregation in treatment facilities, while the South Atlantic (D index = 0.39) had the lowest. Compared to lower segregation, regions with higher levels of segregation (global F test p < 0.001) were associated a lower likelihood of mortality (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82-1.00, p = 0.044 vs. OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83, p < 0. 001) (p = 0.049), greater likelihood of tracheostomy tube placement (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22-1.73, p < 0.001 vs. OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.59-2.21, p < 0.001) (p < 0. 001), and lower likelihood of receiving palliative care (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76-0.93, p < 0.001 vs. OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.59-0.77, p < 0.001) (p = 0.029).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates regional differences in disparities for Black patients with aSAH, particularly in end-of-life care, with varying levels of segregation in regional treatment facilities playing an associated role. The findings underscore the need for targeted interventions and policy changes to address systemic healthcare inequities, reduce segregation, and ensure equitable access to high-quality care for all patients.

Health Equity Adjustment and Hospital Performance in the Medicare Value-Based Purchasing Program

Importance

Medicare's Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program will provide a health equity adjustment (HEA) to hospitals that have greater proportions of patients dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid and that offer high-quality care beginning in fiscal year 2026. However, which hospitals will benefit most from this policy change and to what extent are unknown.

Objective

To estimate potential changes in hospital performance after HEA and examine hospital patient mix, structural, and geographic characteristics associated with receipt of increased payments.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study analyzed all 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021. Publicly available data on program performance and hospital characteristics were linked to Medicare claims data on all inpatient stays for dual-eligible beneficiaries at each hospital to calculate HEA points and HVBP payment adjustments.

Exposures

Hospital Value-Based Purchasing program HEA.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reclassification of HVBP bonus or penalty status and changes in payment adjustments across hospital characteristics.

Results

Of 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021, 1470 (54.9%) received bonuses and 1206 (45.1%) received penalties. After HEA, 102 hospitals (6.9%) were reclassified from bonus to penalty status, whereas 119 (9.9%) were reclassified from penalty to bonus status. At the hospital level, mean (SD) HVBP payment adjustments decreased by $4534 ($90 033) after HEA, ranging from a maximum reduction of $1 014 276 to a maximum increase of $1 523 765. At the aggregate level, net-positive changes in payment adjustments were largest among safety net hospitals ($28 971 708) and those caring for a higher proportion of Black patients ($15 468 445). The likelihood of experiencing increases in payment adjustments was significantly higher among safety net compared with non-safety net hospitals (574 of 683 [84.0%] vs 709 of 1993 [35.6%]; adjusted rate ratio [ARR], 2.04 [95% CI, 1.89-2.20]) and high-proportion Black hospitals compared with non-high-proportion Black hospitals (396 of 523 [75.7%] vs 887 of 2153 [41.2%]; ARR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.29-1.51]). Rural hospitals (374 of 612 [61.1%] vs 909 of 2064 [44.0%]; ARR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30-1.58]), as well as those located in the South (598 of 1040 [57.5%] vs 192 of 439 [43.7%]; ARR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.10-1.42]) and in Medicaid expansion states (801 of 1651 [48.5%] vs 482 of 1025 [47.0%]; ARR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.06-1.28]), were also more likely to experience increased payment adjustments after HEA compared with their urban, Northeastern, and Medicaid nonexpansion state counterparts, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

Medicare's implementation of HEA in the HVBP program will significantly reclassify hospital performance and redistribute program payments, with safety net and high-proportion Black hospitals benefiting most from this policy change. These findings suggest that HEA is an important strategy to ensure that value-based payment programs are more equitable.

Appendicitis Hospitalization Care Costs Among Patients With Delayed Diagnosis of Appendicitis

Importance

Delayed appendicitis diagnosis is associated with worse outcomes. Appendicitis hospital care costs associated with delayed diagnosis are unknown.

Objective

To determine whether delayed appendicitis diagnosis was associated with increased appendicitis hospital care costs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used data from patients receiving an appendectomy aged 18 to 64 years in 5 states (Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Wisconsin) that were captured in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and Emergency Department databases for the years 2016 and 2017 with no additional follow-up. Data were analyzed January through April 2023.

Exposures

Delayed diagnosis was defined as a previous emergency department or inpatient hospital encounter with an abdominal diagnosis other than appendicitis, and no intervention 7 days prior to appendectomy encounter.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was appendicitis hospital care costs. This was calculated from aggregated charges of encounters 7 days prior to appendectomy, the appendectomy encounter, and 30 days postoperatively. Cost-to-charge ratios were applied to charges to obtain costs, which were then adjusted for wage index, inflation to 2022 US dollar, and with extreme outliers winsorized. A multivariable Poisson regression estimated appendicitis hospital care costs associated with a delayed diagnosis while controlling for age, sex, race and ethnicity, insurance status, care discontinuity, income quartile, hospital size, teaching status, medical school affiliation, percentage of Black and Hispanic patient discharges, core-based statistical area, and state.

Results

There were 76 183 patients (38 939 female [51.1%]; 2192 Asian or Pacific Islander [2.9%], 14 132 Hispanic [18.5%], 8195 non-Hispanic Black [10.8%], 46 949 non-Hispanic White [61.6%]) underwent appendectomy, and 2045 (2.7%) had a delayed diagnosis. Delayed diagnosis patients had median (IQR) unadjusted cost of $11 099 ($6752-$17 740) compared with $9177 ($5575-$14 481) for nondelayed (P < .001). Patients with delayed diagnosis had 1.23 times (95% CI, 1.16-1.28 times) adjusted increased appendicitis hospital care costs. The mean marginal cost of delayed diagnosis was $2712 (95% CI, $2083-$3342). Even controlling for delayed diagnosis, non-Hispanic Black patients had 1.22 times (95% CI, 1.17-1.28 times) the adjusted increased appendicitis hospital care costs compared with non-Hispanic White patients.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, delayed diagnosis of appendicitis was associated with increased hospital care costs.

Association between hospital racial composition and aortic valve replacement outcomes: A national inpatients sample database analysis

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic disparities exist in the outcomes following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, it is unclear whether hospital racial composition contributes to these racial disparities.

METHODS

We analyzed the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2015 to 2019 to identify patients with aortic stenosis (AS) who received SAVR and TAVI. The Racial/Ethnic Diversity Index (RDI) was used to assess hospital racial composition as the proportion of nonwhite patients to total hospital admissions. Hospitals were categorized into RDI quintiles. Textbook outcome (TO) was defined as no in-hospital mortality, no postoperative complications and no prolonged length of stay (LOS). Multivariable mixed generalized linear models were conducted to assess the association between RDI and post-SAVR and post-TAVI outcomes. Moreover, quantile regression was used to assess the additional cost and length of stay associated with the RDI quintile.

RESULTS

The study included 82,502 SAVR or TAVI performed across 3285 hospitals, with 47.4% isolated SAVR and 52.5% isolated TAVI. After adjustment, quintiles 4 and 5 demonstrated significantly lower odds of TO than the lowest RDI quintile in both the SAVR cohort (quintile 4, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.73-0.85]; quintile 5, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.73-0.86]) and TAVI cohort (quintile 4, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.82-0.95]; quintile 5, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.74-0.86]). Despite non-observable differences in in-hospital mortality across all RDI quintiles, the rate of AKI and blood transfusion increased with increasing RDI for both cohorts. Further, Higher RDI quintiles were associated with increased costs and longer LOS. From 2015 to 2019, post-TAVI outcomes improved across all RDI quintiles.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals with a higher RDI experienced lower TO achievements, increased AKI, and blood transfusion, along with extended LOS and higher costs. Importantly, post-TAVI outcomes improved from 2015 to 2019 across all RDI groups.

Measuring Equity in Readmission as a Distinct Assessment of Hospital Performance

Importance

Equity is an essential domain of health care quality. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) developed 2 Disparity Methods that together assess equity in clinical outcomes.

Objectives

To define a measure of equitable readmissions; identify hospitals with equitable readmissions by insurance (dual eligible vs non-dual eligible) or patient race (Black vs White); and compare hospitals with and without equitable readmissions by hospital characteristics and performance on accountability measures (quality, cost, and value).

Design, Setting, and Participants

Cross-sectional study of US hospitals eligible for the CMS Hospital-Wide Readmission measure using Medicare data from July 2018 through June 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

We created a definition of equitable readmissions using CMS Disparity Methods, which evaluate hospitals on 2 methods: outcomes for populations at risk for disparities (across-hospital method); and disparities in care within hospitals' patient populations (within-a-single-hospital method).

Exposures

Hospital patient demographics; hospital characteristics; and 3 measures of hospital performance-quality, cost, and value (quality relative to cost).

Results

Of 4638 hospitals, 74% served a sufficient number of dual-eligible patients, and 42% served a sufficient number of Black patients to apply CMS Disparity Methods by insurance and race. Of eligible hospitals, 17% had equitable readmission rates by insurance and 30% by race. Hospitals with equitable readmissions by insurance or race cared for a lower percentage of Black patients (insurance, 1.9% [IQR, 0.2%-8.8%] vs 3.3% [IQR, 0.7%-10.8%], P < .01; race, 7.6% [IQR, 3.2%-16.6%] vs 9.3% [IQR, 4.0%-19.0%], P = .01), and differed from nonequitable hospitals in multiple domains (teaching status, geography, size; P < .01). In examining equity by insurance, hospitals with low costs were more likely to have equitable readmissions (odds ratio, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.38-1.77), and there was no relationship between quality and value, and equity. In examining equity by race, hospitals with high overall quality were more likely to have equitable readmissions (odds ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03-1.26]), and there was no relationship between cost and value, and equity.

Conclusion and Relevance

A minority of hospitals achieved equitable readmissions. Notably, hospitals with equitable readmissions were characteristically different from those without. For example, hospitals with equitable readmissions served fewer Black patients, reinforcing the role of structural racism in hospital-level inequities. Implementation of an equitable readmission measure must consider unequal distribution of at-risk patients among hospitals.

Distribution of Cancer Care Resources Across US Hospitals by Patient Race and Ethnicity

This cross-sectional study assesses the availability of cancer-related services in hospitals with predominantly racial and ethnic minority patient populations.

Disparities in guideline-compliant care for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at minority-versus non-minority-serving hospitals

BACKGROUND

We examined disparities in guideline-compliant care at minority-serving hospitals (MSH) versus non-MSH among patients with localized or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Patients with PDAC were identified within the National Cancer Database (2004-2018). Guideline-compliant care was defined as surgery + chemotherapy ± radiation therapy for localized and chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Facilities in the top decile of minority patients treated were considered MSH.

RESULTS

A total of 190,950 patients were identified and most (59.6%) had metastatic disease. Overall, 6.4% of patients with localized and 8.2% of patients with metastatic disease were treated at MSH. Patients treated at MSH were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care (localized: OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67-0.91; metastatic: OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67-0.88). Minority patients were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care at non-MSH (localized: OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.67-0.75; metastatic: OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89) or MSH (localized: OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74-0.98; metastatic: OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82-0.99). Patients treated at non-MSH or MSH who received guideline-compliant care were more likely to have higher OS regardless of stage or race.

CONCLUSIONS

MSH patients were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care and minority patients were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care regardless of MSH status. Guideline-compliant care was associated with improved OS.

Association of Minority-Serving Hospital Status with Post-Discharge Care Utilization and Expenditures in Gastrointestinal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Disparities in utilization of post-discharge care and overall expenditures may relate to site of care and race/ethnicity. We sought to define the impact of minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) on postoperative outcomes, discharge disposition, and overall expenditures associated with an episode of surgical care.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for esophageal, colon, rectal, pancreatic, and liver cancer were identified from Medicare Standard Analytic Files (2013-2017). A MSH was defined as the top decile of facilities treating minority patients (Black and/or Hispanic). The impact of MSH on outcomes of interest was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear regression models. Textbook outcome (TO) was defined as no postoperative complications, no prolonged length of stay, and no 90-day mortality or readmission.

RESULTS

Among 113,263 patients, only a small subset of patients underwent surgery at MSHs (n = 4404, 3.9%). While 52.3% of patients achieved TO, rates were lower at MSHs (MSH: 47.2% vs. non-MSH: 52.5%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, receiving care at an MSH was associated with not achieving TO (odds ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.87) and concomitantly higher odds of additional post-discharge care (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20). Patients treated at an MSH also had higher median post-discharge expenditures (MSH: $8400, interquartile range [IQR] $2300-$22,100 vs. non-MSH: $7000, IQR $2200-$17,900; p = 0.002). In fact, MSHs remained associated with a 11.05% (9.78-12.33%) increase in index expenditures and a 16.68% (11.44-22.17%) increase in post-discharge expenditures.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing surgery at a MSH were less likely to achieve a TO. Additionally, MSH status was associated with a higher likelihood of requiring post-discharge care and higher expenditures.

Race and Ethnicity and Emergency Department Discharge Against Medical Advice

Importance

Although discharges against medical advice (DAMA) are associated with greater morbidity and mortality, little is known about current racial and ethnic disparities in DAMA from the emergency department (ED) nationally.

Objective

To characterize current patterns of racial and ethnic disparities in rates of ED DAMA.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample on all hospital ED visits made between January to December 2019 in the US.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was odds of ED DAMA for Black and Hispanic patients compared with White patients nationally and in analysis adjusted for sociodemographic factors. Secondary analysis examined hospital-level variation in DAMA rates for Black, Hispanic, and White patients.

Results

The study sample included 33 147 251 visits to 989 hospitals, representing the estimated 143 million ED visits in 2019. The median age of patients was 40 years (IQR, 22-61 years). Overall, 1.6% of ED visits resulted in DAMA. DAMA rates were higher for Black patients (2.1%) compared with Hispanic (1.6%) and White (1.4%) patients, males (1.7%) compared with females (1.5%), those with no insurance (2.8%), those with lower income (<$27 999; 1.9%), and those aged 35 to 49 years (2.2%). DAMA visits were highest at metropolitan teaching hospitals (1.8%) and hospitals that served greater proportions of racial and ethnic minoritized patients (serving ≥57.9%; 2.1%). Odds of DAMA were greater for Black patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.31-1.57) and Hispanic patients (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.29) compared with White patients. After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, income, and insurance status), the adjusted OR (AOR) for DAMA was lower for Black patients compared with the unadjusted OR (AOR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.28) and there was no difference in odds for Hispanic patients (AOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.92-1.15) compared with White patients. After additional adjustment for hospital random intercepts, DAMA disparities reversed, with Black and Hispanic patients having lower odds of DAMA compared with White patients (Black patients: AOR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.90-0.98]; Hispanic patients: AOR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.63-0.72]). The intraclass correlation in this secondary analysis model was 0.118 (95% CI, 0.104-0.133).

Conclusions and Relevance

This national cross-sectional study found that Black and Hispanic patients had greater odds of ED DAMA than White patients in unadjusted analysis. Disparities were reversed after patient-level and hospital-level risk adjustment, and greater between-hospital than within-hospital variation in DAMA was observed, suggesting that Black and Hispanic patients are more likely to receive care in hospitals with higher DAMA rates. Structural racism may contribute to ED DAMA disparities via unequal allocation of health care resources in hospitals that disproportionately treat racial and ethnic minoritized groups. Monitoring variation in DAMA by race and ethnicity and hospital suggests an opportunity to improve equitable access to health care.

Ten health policy challenges for the next 10 years

Health policies and associated research initiatives are constantly evolving and changing. In recent years, there has been a dizzying increase in research on emerging topics such as the implications of changing public and private health payment models, the global impact of pandemics, novel initiatives to tackle the persistence of health inequities, broad efforts to reduce the impact of climate change, the emergence of novel technologies such as whole-genome sequencing and artificial intelligence, and the increase in consumer-directed care. This evolution demands future-thinking research to meet the needs of policymakers in translating science into policy. In this paper, the Health Affairs Scholar editorial team describes "ten health policy challenges for the next 10 years." Each of the ten assertions describes the challenges and steps that can be taken to address those challenges. We focus on issues that are traditionally studied by health services researchers such as cost, access, and quality, but then examine emerging and intersectional topics: equity, income, and justice; technology, pharmaceuticals, markets, and innovation; population health; and global health.

A Nominal Group Technique Study of Patients Who Identify as Black or African American and Access to Renal Transplantation

Introduction: Completion of the renal transplant evaluation has been associated with several barriers for patients who identify as Black or African American. This study sought to prioritize barriers to and motivators of completing the renal transplant evaluation. Methods/Approach: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with a nominal group technique were used to generate priority scores. Transplant professionals (N = 23) were recruited from 9 transplant centers in the Mid-Atlantic, Mid-Western, and Southeastern parts of the United States. Black or African American identifying renal patients (N = 30) diagnosed with end-stage kidney disease were recruited from 1 transplant center in the Mid-Atlantic region. Findings: Priority scores were created to assess the quantitative data of participant rankings of top barriers and motivators. The most significant barriers identified by both patients and transplant professionals comprised financial constraints, insurance issues, difficulty navigating the healthcare system, transportation difficulties, and multiple health problems. Facilitators consisted of family/social support, transplant education, patient navigators, comprehensive insurance, and physician repertoire and investment. A qualitative description of the ranked factors resulted in themes classified as intrapersonal, health, socioeconomic, transplant-specific healthcare, and general healthcare. Conclusion: These findings provided vital information to transplant centers nationwide about assessing the influences of renal transplant evaluation completion. Achieving equity in access to transplantation for Black or African American renal patients requires multilayered approaches.

Patient and Hospital Characteristics Associated With Delayed Diagnosis of Appendicitis

Importance

Racial disparities in timely diagnosis and treatment of surgical conditions exist; however, it is poorly understood whether there are hospital structural measures or patient-level characteristics that modify this phenomenon.

Objective

To assess whether patient race and ethnicity are associated with delayed appendicitis diagnosis and postoperative 30-day hospital use and whether there are patient- or systems-level factors that modify this association.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based, retrospective cohort study used data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's state inpatient and emergency department (ED) databases from 4 states (Florida, Maryland, New York, and Wisconsin) for patients aged 18 to 64 years who underwent appendectomy from January 7, 2016, to December 1, 2017. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2017.

Exposure

Delayed diagnosis of appendicitis, defined as an initial ED presentation with an abdominal diagnosis other than appendicitis followed by re-presentation within a week for appendectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A mixed-effects multivariable Poisson regression model was used to estimate the association of delayed diagnosis of appendicitis with race and ethnicity while controlling for patient and hospital variables. A second mixed-effects multivariable Poisson regression model quantified the association of delayed diagnosis of appendicitis with postoperative 30-day hospital use.

Results

Of 80 312 patients who received an appendectomy during the study period (median age, 38 years [IQR, 27-50 years]; 50.8% female), 2013 (2.5%) experienced delayed diagnosis. In the entire cohort, 2.9% of patients were Asian or Pacific Islander, 18.8% were Hispanic, 10.9% were non-Hispanic Black, 60.8% were non-Hispanic White, and 6.6% were other race and ethnicity; most were privately insured (60.2%). Non-Hispanic Black patients had a 1.41 (95% CI, 1.21-1.63) times higher adjusted rate of delayed diagnosis compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Patients at hospitals with a more than 50% Black or Hispanic population had a 0.73 (95% CI, 0.59-0.91) decreased adjusted rate of delayed appendicitis diagnosis compared with hospitals with a less than 25% Black or Hispanic population. Conversely, patients at hospitals with more than 50% of discharges of Medicaid patients had a 3.51 (95% CI, 1.69-7.28) higher adjusted rate of delayed diagnosis compared with hospitals with less than 10% of discharges of Medicaid patients. Additional factors associated with delayed diagnosis included female sex, higher levels of patient comorbidity, and living in a low-income zip code. Delayed diagnosis was associated with a 1.38 (95% CI, 1.36-1.61) increased adjusted rate of postoperative 30-day hospital use.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, non-Hispanic Black patients had higher rates of delayed appendicitis diagnosis and 30-day hospital use than White patients. Patients presenting to hospitals with a greater than 50% Black and Hispanic population were less likely to experience delayed diagnosis, suggesting that seeking care at a hospital that serves a diverse patient population may help mitigate the increased rate of delayed diagnosis observed for non-Hispanic Black patients.