Factors affecting the likelihood of presentation to the emergency department of trauma patients after discharge

The effect of social determinants of health on patient outcomes in acute trauma: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Social determinants of health (SDoH) may mediate disparities, but their effect on outcomes after trauma is not well known. The purpose of this review is to improve existing gaps of knowledge for a broad range of SDoH and trauma-related outcomes.

METHODS

This was a systematic search to identify studies that evaluated the effect of race, insurance status, socioeconomic status (SES), health literacy, and community deprivation on inpatient mortality, morbidity, and post-discharge health care utilization in diverse trauma populations ≥16 years. Data were extracted on study design, patient and injury characteristics, outcomes, and covariates. Qualitative analysis was performed and reported results were stratified by exposure. An overall assessment of the strength of evidence for key clinically relevant comparisons was conducted.

RESULTS

60 studies were included. Overall, race was not meaningfully predictive of mortality or morbidity, with evidence reporting inconsistent or small magnitude of effects. However, African American/Black race was consistently associated with decreased odds of discharge to rehabilitation. Compared to insured patients, uninsured patients may have greater mortality risk and be less likely to discharge to rehabilitation. Studies evaluating health literacy or community deprivation reported conflicting results.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities related to race are most profound for post-discharge health care utilization, while insurance status may be a strong negative predictor of both mortality and discharge disposition. More research is needed on health literacy and community deprivation to better understand mechanisms of disparity after trauma. Interventions targeted at improving continuity of inpatient and outpatient care may be beneficial.

Characterizing a Common Phenomenon: Why do Trauma Patients Re-present to the Emergency Department?

INTRODUCTION

Trauma patients return to the emergency department (ED) at alarmingly high rates, despite not all patients requiring hospital resources. Reasons for ED re-presentation and associated risk factors have not been fully investigated.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of adult trauma admissions at an urban safety net level 1 trauma center (1/12018-12/312021). Risk factors for ED re-presentation were identified using purposeful selection and modeled using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 2491 patients, 19% returned within 30 d (N = 475). Most patients presented for uncontrolled pain (37%, N = 175), medical concerns (25%, N = 119), and infection (10%, N = 49). The readmission rates varied as follows: 18% for uncontrolled pain (N = 32), 42% for medical concerns (N = 50), and 67% for infection (N = 33). Risk factors for uncontrolled pain included depression/anxiety (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-3.05), substance use disorder (SUD) (aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.12-2.43), and penetrating mechanism of injury (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.59-3.18). Risk factors for medical concerns included number of medical comorbidities (aOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.52), depression/anxiety (aOR 1.97, 95% CI 1.28-3.01), SUD (aOR 2.48, 95% CI 1.65-3.74), and nonhome discharge disposition (aOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.07-2.28). Risk factors for infection included non-English primary language (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.82-6.39), SUD (aOR 2.00, 95% CI 1.03-3.88), and nonhome discharge disposition (aOR 2.06, 95% CI 1.15-3.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Uncontrolled pain was the most common reason for re-presentation, although only a small fraction required readmission. Patients with penetrating injury may benefit from improved pain control. Primary care provider follow-up may help mitigate risk of medical disease exacerbation, and wound care instructions for non-English speaking patients may decrease re-presentation for infection.

Scheduled Follow-Up and Association with Emergency Department Use and Readmission after Trauma

BACKGROUND

After traumatic injury, 13% to 14% of patients use the emergency department (ED) and 11% are readmitted within 30 days. Decreasing ED visits and readmission represents a target for quality improvement. This cohort study evaluates risk factors for ED visits and readmission after trauma, focusing on outpatient follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult trauma admissions from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021. Our primary exposure was outpatient follow-up, primary outcome was ED use, and secondary outcome was readmission. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association between primary exposure and outcomes, adjusting for factors identified on unadjusted analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 2,266 patients met inclusion criteria, with an 11.3% ED visit rate and 4.1% readmission rate. Attending follow-up did not have a significant association with ED visit (odds ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.01, p = 0.05) or readmission rate (odds ratio 1.68, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.99, p = 0.08). Significant associations with ED use included non-White race, depression, anxiety, substance use disorder, discharge disposition, and being discharged with lines or drains. Significant associations with readmission included depression, anxiety, and discharge disposition.

CONCLUSIONS

Emphasizing outpatient follow-up in trauma patients is not an effective target to decrease ED use or readmission. Future studies should focus on supporting patients with mental health comorbidities and investigating interventions to optimally engage with trauma patients after hospital discharge.

Risk factors for loss to follow-up after traumatic injury: An updated view of a chronic problem

BACKGROUND

Loss to follow-up after traumatic injury occurs at rates of up to 47%. However, the most recent data are over a decade old, and recent changes in traumatic injury patterns necessitate an updated assessment of risk factors for loss to follow-up after trauma.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of trauma admissions from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2021. Categorical variables were compared using χ2 analyses, and continuous variables were analyzed using Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for relevant factors identified on unadjusted analysis.

RESULTS

Among 3,034 patients, overall loss to follow-up was 36.9%. Non-White patients, patients who underwent operations or non-surgical procedures, and patients discharged to rehabilitation facilities were more likely to have follow-up appointments within 30 days. Patients with substance use disorder and, among White patients, those with public insurance had higher loss to follow-up rates. Having a follow-up appointment scheduled with a primary care provider was the single most significant factor associated with attending a follow-up appointment.

CONCLUSION

Social determinants of health, such as insurance status and substance use disorder, are associated with loss of follow-up after trauma. Primary care appointments are associated with the highest attendance rates, supporting that all patients should be offered primary care appointments after traumatic injury.

Emergency department visit patterns in the recently discharged, violently injured patient: Retrospective cohort review

BACKGROUND

Analysis of the costs associated with emergency department (ED) visits after discharge for violent injury could highlight subgroups for the development of cost-effective interventions to support healing and prevent treatment failures in violently injured patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort review was conducted of all patients with return ED visits within 90 days of discharge after treatment for a violent injury occurring between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2018. Hospital costs were calculated for each incidence and analyzed against demographic and injury type variables to identify trends.

RESULTS

218 return ED visits were identified. Hospital costs showed a high frequency of low-cost visits. For more complex visits, distinct cost patterns were observed for Black and LatinX males compared to White males as a function of age.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of hospital cost per visit identified trends among different subgroups. Underlying etiologies presumably vary between groups, but hypothesis-driven further investigation and needs assessment is required. Understanding the driving forces behind these cost trends may aid in developing effective interventions.

The Impact of the Affordable Care Act on Outpatient Spine Trauma Consult Follow-up

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on spine trauma patient follow-up.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although damage to the spinal column accounts for a small proportion of all traumatic injuries, it results in a significant burden on the patient, provider, and health care system. Postoperative follow-up is essential to direct rehabilitation, prevent early deterioration, and manage complications early in the postoperative period. Previous studies have established the role of insurance coverage on follow-up compliance, however, the impact of the ACA on follow-up has been scant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed upon institutional review board approval of spine trauma patients consulted by orthopedic spine or neurosurgery from January 2013 to December 2013 (pre-ACA) and January 2015 to December 2015 (post-ACA). Patient demographics, surgical case characteristics, and follow-up compliance were assessed via manual chart review. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify predictors of follow-up in the overall cohort, as well as within nonoperative and operative patients.

RESULTS

A total of 827 patients were included in the final analysis after inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, patient follow-up significantly increased after implementation of the ACA (P<0.001), with pre-ACA follow-up at 35.0% (144/411) and post-ACA follow-up at 50.0% (208/516). Multivariate regression analysis further corroborated these findings, showing post-ACA status associated with a 1.66-fold higher likelihood of follow-up. Among nonoperative patients, the ACA failed to make a significant difference in follow-up (P=0.56), however, patients treated operatively showed a significantly higher likelihood of follow-up (odds ratio=2.92, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative follow-up is an essential part of patient care, aiding in improving clinical outcomes and limiting the economic burden on the health care system. This study suggests that passage of the ACA significantly improved patient follow-up for operatively managed patients but not for nonoperatively managed patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Lack of Association of Household Income and Acute Gastroenteritis Disease Severity in Young Children: A Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine if low household income is associated with disease severity following emergency department (ED) discharge in children with acute gastroenteritis (AGE).

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis employing data collected in 10 US-based tertiary-care, pediatric EDs between 2014 and 2017. Participants were aged 3 to 48 months and presented for care due to AGE. Income status was defined based on 1) home ZIP Code median annual home income and 2) percentage of home ZIP Code households below the poverty threshold. The primary outcome was moderate-to-severe AGE, defined by a post-ED visit Modified Vesikari Scale (MVS) score ≥9. Secondary outcomes included in-person revisits, revisits with intravenous rehydration, hospitalization, and etiologic pathogens.

RESULTS

About 943 (97%) participants with a median age of 17 months (interquartile range 10, 28) completed follow-up. Post-ED visit MVS scores were lower for the lowest household income group (adjusted: -0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.13, -0.07). Odds of experiencing an MVS score ≥9 did not differ between groups (adjusted odds ratio: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.52). No difference in the post-ED visit MVS score or the proportion of participants with scores ≥9 was observed using the national poverty threshold definition. For both income definitions, there were no differences in terms of revisits following discharge, hospitalizations, and intravenous rehydration. Bacterial enteropathogens were more commonly identified in the lowest socioeconomic group using both definitions.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower household income was not associated with increased disease severity or resource use. Economic disparities do not appear to result in differences in the disease course of children with AGE seeking ED care.

Emergency department return visits and hospital admissions in trauma team assessed patients initially discharged from the emergency department: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Many injured patients are transported directly to trauma centers, found to be minimally injured, and discharged directly home from the emergency department (ED). Our objectives were to characterize the short-term outcomes in this discharged patient population and to identify patient factors predictive of ED return visits.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study using linked administrative datasets involving patients assessed at trauma centers in Ontario, Canada between April 1, 2009 and March 31, 2020. Patients who were assessed by a trauma team and discharged directly home from ED were included. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with an ED return visit within 14-days. We used multivariate logistic regression analyses to identify patient characteristics predictive of at least one ED return visit.

RESULTS

There were 5550 patients included in the study. 1004 (18.1%) of patients had at least one ED return visit but only 100 patients (1.8%) were admitted to hospital following initial discharge. Common reasons for ED return visits included wound care concerns (17.2%), head injury complaints (15.6%), and substance misuse (6.8%). Rural residence (OR 1.83, 95% CI: 1.45 - 2.29), history of anxiety disorder (OR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.54 - 2.73), high baseline ED usage (OR 2.58, 95% CI: 2.03 - 3.28), penetrating injury (OR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.20 - 1.68), and extremity fracture (OR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.24 - 1.88) predicted return visits.

CONCLUSION

Patients discharged directly have high rates of ED return visits but low rates of hospital admission or delayed surgical intervention. Trauma services should expand quality assurance initiatives to capture return visits, understand any gaps in clinical service provision, and aim to minimize unnecessary ED return visits.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level VI prognostic study.

Measuring Health Equity in Emergency Care Using Routinely Collected Data: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Achieving equity in health care remains a challenge for health care systems worldwide and marked inequities in access and quality of care persist. Identifying health care equity indicators is an important first step in integrating the concept of equity into assessments of health care system performance, particularly in emergency care.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review of administrative data-derived health care equity indicators and their association with socioeconomic determinants of health (SEDH) in emergency care settings. Following PRISMA-Equity reporting guidelines, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies. The outcomes of interest were indicators of health care equity and the associated SEDH they examine.

Results: Among 29 studies identified, 14 equity indicators were identified and grouped into four categories that reflect the patient emergency care pathway. Total emergency department (ED) visits and ambulatory care-sensitive condition-related ED visits were the two most frequently used equity indicators. The studies analyzed equity based on seven SEDH: social deprivation, income, education level, social class, insurance coverage, health literacy, and financial and nonfinancial barriers. Despite some conflicting results, all identified SEDH are associated with inequalities in access to and use of emergency care.

Conclusion: The use of administrative data-derived indicators in combination with identified SEDH could improve the measurement of health care equity in emergency care settings across health care systems worldwide. Using a combination of indicators is likely to lead to a more comprehensive, well-rounded measurement of health care equity than using any one indicator in isolation. Although studies analyzed focused on emergency care settings, it seems possible to extrapolate these indicators to measure equity in other areas of the health care system. Further studies elucidating root causes of health inequities in and outside the health care system are needed.

Victims of Violence and Post-Discharge Adverse Events: A Prospective Modified Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) Study

Introduction

Trauma patients frequently return to an emergency department (ED) soon after discharge; often for non-urgent reasons. Social factors contribute to higher ED usage. At present, there is no standardized system for reporting of ED visits and readmissions among trauma care. We hypothesized that victims of violent crime suffer from many early post-discharge adverse events that has not been captured by current methods.

Methods

We prospectively consented and enrolled injured patients from January 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2019. We documented 30-day post-discharge events using post-discharge phone calls and detailed chart abstraction. Patients were categorized as victims of violence (VV) or unintentional traumatic injury (UT).

Results

During the study period, 444 patients were enrolled. Fifty-one (11.5%) were victims of violence and 393 (88.5%) experienced unintentional injuries. The VV patients were younger (40.10 vs 60.36; p<0.0001), and more predominantly male (92.16% vs 57.51%; p<0.0001). Total injury severity score (ISS), critical care length of stay (LOS), and total LOS were similar. VV patients were more likely discharged home (70.59% vs 55.47%; p=0.0403). They were significantly more likely to return to an emergency department (47.06% vs 23.16%; p<0.0005) and had more total number of ED visits per patient. Readmission rates, however, were not different (21.57% vs 16.28%; p=NS). The VV patients more frequently were underinsured (72.5%, vs 20.6%, p<0.005).

Discussion

Victims of violence presented to the ED significantly more often, despite similar injury scores, LOS, and being of younger age. Of these patients, only 26.2% of ED presentations resulted in readmission, suggesting the majority of patient complaints may have been able to be managed in an office-based setting. VV had significantly more underinsured or subsidized patients. Victims of violence are vulnerable and may benefit from more resources provided in the early post-discharge period.

The impact of retained bullet fragments on outcomes in patients with gunshot wounds

BACKGROUND

Nationally, 115,000 non-fatal firearm injuries occurred in 2017, with many such victims possessing retained bullet fragments (RBFs); however, the impact of RBFs has not been well studied.

METHODS

An institutional trauma database from an urban, level one trauma center was queried for patients presenting with gunshot wounds (GSWs) to the ED in 2017. GSWs were stratified by the presence or absence of RBFs. Groups were compared using t-tests, chi-squared, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 674 patients with GSWs who met inclusion criteria, 394 had RBFs versus 280 with no RBFs. Patients with RBFs were more likely admitted from the ED (57.4% vs. 41.8%, p < 0.001), had significantly higher rates of return to the ED within six months (30.7% vs. 18.6%, p < 0.001), and higher rates of subsequent GSW in the next year (5.1% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.03). On return to ED, 17.6% of those with a RBF had symptoms associated with their RBF.

CONCLUSION

RBFs may represent an unrecognized risk factor for both repeat ED visits and subsequent bullet injury.

Injuries and frequent use of emergency department services: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review all studies having examined the association between patients with physical injuries and frequent emergency department (ED) attendance or return visits.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCE

Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and PsycINFO databases were searched up to and including July 2019.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

English and French language publications reporting on frequent use of ED services (frequent attendance and return visits), evaluating injured patients and using regression analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers screened the search results, and assessed methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool for prevalence studies. Results were collated and summarised using a narrative synthesis. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the repercussions of removing a study that did not meet the quality criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 2184 studies yielded by this search, 1957 remained after the removal of duplicates. Seventy-eight studies underwent full-text screening leaving nine that met the eligibility criteria and were included in this study: five retrospective cohort studies; two prospective cohort studies; one cross-sectional study; and one case-control study. Different types of injuries were represented, including fractures, trauma and physical injuries related to falls, domestic violence or accidents. Sample sizes ranged from 200 to 1 259 809. Six studies included a geriatric population while three addressed a younger population. Of the four studies evaluating the relationship between injuries and frequent ED use, three reported an association. Additionally, of the five studies in which the dependent variable was return ED visits, three articles identified a positive association with injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical injuries appear to be associated with frequent use of ED services (frequent ED attendance as well as return ED visits). Further research into factors including relevant youth-related covariates such as substance abuse and different types of traumas should be undertaken to bridge the gap in understanding this association.

Trauma patients returning to the emergency department after discharge

BACKGROUND

While readmission rates of trauma patients are well described, little has been reported on rates of re-presentation to the emergency department (ED) after discharge. This study aimed to determine rates and contributing factors of re-presentation of trauma patients to the ED.

METHODS

One-year retrospective analysis of discharged adult trauma patients at a county-funded safety-net level one trauma center.

RESULTS

Of 1416 trauma patients, 195 (13.8%) re-presented to the ED within 30 days. Of those that re-presented, 47 (24.1%) were re-admitted (3.3% overall). The most common reasons for re-presentation were pain control and wound complications. Patients with Medicare (AOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 5.2) or other government insurance (AOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 4.1) were more likely to re-present than patients with private insurance.

CONCLUSION

A considerable number of trauma patients re-presented to the ED after discharge for reasons that did not require hospitalization. Discharge planning for certain vulnerable groups should emphasize wound care, pain control and scheduled follow-up to decrease the reliance on the ED.

A multicenter mixed-effects model for inference and prediction of 72-h return visits to the emergency department for adult patients with trauma-related diagnoses

Objective

Emergency department (ED) return visits within 72 h may be a sign of poor quality of care and entail unnecessary use of healthcare resources. In this study, we compare the performance of two leading statistical and machine learning classification algorithms, and we use the best performing approach to identify novel risk factors of ED return visits.

Methods

We analyzed 3.2 million ED encounters with at least one diagnosis under “injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes” and “external causes of morbidity.” These encounters included patients 18 years or older from across 128 emergency room facilities in the USA. For each encounter, we calculated the 72-h ED return status and retrieved 57 features from demographics, diagnoses, procedures, and medications administered during the process of administration of medical care. We implemented a mixed-effects model to assess the effects of the covariates while accounting for the hierarchical structure of the data. Additionally, we investigated the predictive accuracy of the extreme gradient boosting tree ensemble approach and compared the performance of the two methods.

Results

The mixed-effects model indicates that certain blunt force and non-blunt trauma inflates the risk of a return visit. Notably, patients with trauma to the head and patients with burns and corrosions have elevated risks. This is in addition to 11 other classes of both blunt force and non-blunt force traumas. In addition, prior healthcare resource utilization, patients who have had one or more prior return visits within the last 6 months, prior ED visits, and the number of hospitalizations within the 6 months are associated with increased risk of returning to the ED after discharge. On the one hand, the area under the receiver characteristic curve (AUROC) of the mixed-effects model was 0.710 (0.707, 0.712). On the other hand, the gradient boosting tree ensemble had a lower AUROC of 0.698 CI (0.696, 0.700) on the independent test model.

Conclusions

The proposed mixed-effects model achieved the highest known AUC and resulted in the identification of novel risk factors. The model outperformed one of the leading machine learning ensemble classifiers, the extreme gradient boosting tree in terms of model performance. The risk factors we identified can assist emergency departments to decrease the number of unplanned return visits within 72 h.

Readmission rates and associated factors following rib cage injury

BACKGROUND

There remains a lack of knowledge about readmission characteristics after sustaining rib fractures. We aimed to determine rates, characteristics, and predictive/protective factors associated with unexpected reevaluation and readmission after rib cage injury.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed based on trauma patients evaluated at an urban Level I trauma center from January 2014 to December 2016. Adult patients sustaining blunt trauma with more than one rib fracture or a sternomanubrial fracture were defined as having moderate to severe rib cage injury. Exclusion criteria included penetrating injury, death during initial hospitalization, and only one rib fracture. Reevaluation was defined as presenting at a hospital within 90 days of discharge urgently or emergently. Demographics, injury characteristics, comorbidities, complications, imaging, and readmission data were collected. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed with a significance of p less than 0.05.

RESULTS

During the study period, 11,667 patients underwent trauma evaluation, of which 1,717 patients were found to have a moderate to severe rib cage injury. Within 90 days, 397 (23.1%) of patients underwent reevaluation, while 177 (10.3%) required readmission. One hundred forty-two (8.3%) patients were reevaluated specifically for chest-related complaints, and 55 (3.2%) required readmission. On univariate analysis, Injury Severity Score greater than 15, hospital length of stay longer than 7 days, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay longer than 3 days, a worsened chest x-ray at discharge, a psychiatric comorbidity, a smoking comorbidity, deep vein thrombosis, unplanned readmission to the ICU, and unplanned intubation were higher in the overall reevaluation cohort. On multivariate analysis, age of 15 years to 35 years, Risk Assessment Profile score greater than 8, hypertension, psychiatric comorbidity, current smoker, and unplanned return to the ICU on index admission were predictive of reevaluation of overall reevaluation.

CONCLUSION

Moderate to severe rib cage injury is associated with high rates of reevaluation and readmission. Younger patients who smoke and required a return to the ICU are at greater risk for readmission.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, Prognostic and Epidemiologic.

Back so soon? Characterizing emergency department use after trauma

BACKGROUND

Trauma readmissions have been well studied but little data exists regarding Emergency Department (ED) utilization following an injury. This study was performed to determine the factors associated with a return to the ED after trauma.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all adult trauma patients evaluated between January and December of 2014 was performed. Demographics, follow-up plan, and characteristics of ED visits within 30 days of discharge were recorded. Predictive factors of ED utilization were identified using univariate analysis and multi-logistic regression.

RESULTS

Fourteen percent of 1836 consecutive patients returned to the ED within 30 days of initial trauma. On multi-logistic regression, penetrating trauma (OR 2.15 p = 0.001), and scheduled follow-up (OR 1.81 p = 0.046) remained significant predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Penetrating trauma victims are at increased risk of returning to the ED, most often because of wound or pain issues. Recognizing these factors allows for targeted interventions to decrease ED resource utilization.

Creating Value by Prioritizing Mental and Social Health After Injury

Given the strong influence of mental and social health on symptom intensity and magnitude of limitations, attempts to increase value in orthopedic trauma must attend to emotional and social recovery. Low value and potentially harmful interventions after trauma such as excessive reliance on medication, low value surgeries for "delayed healing" or "symptomatic implants," repeated visits with a physical therapist, and other biomedical interventions often reflect misdiagnosis and mismanagement of social and mental health. A better approach is to anticipate emotional and social recovery; to get social and mental health specialists involved immediately after injury; and to develop strategies that set firm limits on biomedical tests and treatments that are unlikely to contribute to health and risk reinforcing stress, distress, and less effective coping strategies.

A different form of injury prevention: Successful screening and referral for human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus in a trauma population

BACKGROUND

In the United States, millions of patients are living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) (0.44% and 1.5%) and many are currently undiagnosed. Because highly effective treatments are now available, early identification of these patients is extremely important to achieve improved clinical outcomes. Prior data and trauma-associated risk factors suggest a higher prevalence of both diseases in the trauma population. We hypothesized that a screening program could be successfully initiated among trauma activation patients and that a referral and linkage-to-care program could be developed.

METHODS

Hepatitis C virus and HIV screening tests were added to standard trauma activation laboratory orders at an academic Level I Trauma Center. Confirmatory viral load was sent when indicated. Patients with positive results were educated about their disease and referred to disease-specific follow-up. Data were collected prospectively from January 1, 2016, until June 30, 2017. Total and new diagnosis, referral rates, and linkage-to-care rates were analyzed.

RESULTS

One thousand eight hundred ninety-eight patients arrived as trauma activations. One thousand two hundred seventeen (64.1%) patients were screened (Level A, 75.6%; Level B, 60.2%). Seven percent of the screened patients were initially positive, and 5.5% were confirmed positive. Rates of both HIV (1.1%) and HCV (4.4%) were almost triple the national average. Overall, 3.3% screened positive for a new diagnosis. For HCV, the rate of new diagnosis was twice the national average (3%). Over 85% of all cases were referred for follow-up, and the combined linkage-to-care rate was 43.3%.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients were screened and referred for follow-up, indicating successful implementation of our trauma screening program. Routine screening of trauma patients should be considered to increase diagnosis rate, increase linkage-to-care rates, and decrease disease transmission. These screening efforts would help bridge the health care gap that exists in the trauma population due to lower insurance rates and limited access to primary care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care management, level III.

The role of sociodemographics in the occurrence of orthopaedic trauma

INTRODUCTION

We sought to determine the effects of sociodemographic factors on the occurrence of orthopaedic injuries in an adult population presenting to a level 1 trauma center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who received orthopaedic trauma care at a level 1 academic trauma center.

RESULTS

20,919 orthopaedic trauma injury cases were treated at an academic level 1 trauma center between 01 January 1993 and 27 August 2017. Following application of inclusion/exclusion criteria, a total of 14,654 patients were retrieved for analysis. Out of 14,654 patients, 4602 (31.4%) belonged to low socioeconomic status (SES), 4961 (32.0%) to middle SES and 5361 (36.6%) to high SES. Following adjustment for age, sex, race, insurance status and injury severity score (ISS), patients belonging to middle SES vs. low SES (OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.63-0.94]; p = 0.009) or high SES vs. low SES (OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.62-0.95]; p = 0.016) had lower odds of receiving a penetrating injury as compared to a blunt injury.

CONCLUSION

The results from this study indicate that a link exists between sociodemographic factors and the occurrence of orthopaedic injuries presenting to a level 1 trauma center. The most common cause of injury varied within age groups, by sex, and within the different socioeconomic groups.

Trauma transitional care coordination: A mature system at work

BACKGROUND

We have previously demonstrated effectiveness of a Trauma Transitional Care Coordination (TTCC) Program in reducing 30-day readmission rates for trauma patients most at risk. With program maturation, we achieved improved readmission rates for specific patient populations.

METHODS

TTCC is a nursing driven program that supports patients at high risk for 30-day readmission. The TTCC interventions include calls to patients within 72 hours of discharge, complete medication reconciliation, coordination of medical appointments, and individualized problem solving. Account IDs were used to link TTCC patients with the Health Services Cost Review Commission database to collect data on statewide unplanned 30-day readmissions.

RESULTS

Four hundred seventy-five patients were enrolled in the TTCC program from January 2014 to September 2016. Only 10.5% (n = 50) of TTCC enrollees were privately insured, 54.5% had Medicaid (n = 259), and 13.5% had Medicare (n = 64). Seventy-three percent had Health Services Cost Review Commission severity of injury ratings of 3 or 4 (maximum severity of injury = 4). The most common All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups for participants were: lower-extremity procedures (n = 67, 14%); extensive abdominal/thoracic procedures (n = 40, 8.4%); musculoskeletal procedures (n = 37, 7.8%); complicated tracheostomy and upper extremity procedures (n = 29 each, 6.1%); infectious disease complications (n = 14, 2.9%); major chest/respiratory trauma, major small and large bowel procedures and vascular procedures (n = 13 each, 2.7%). The TTCC participants with lower-extremity injury, complicated tracheostomy, and bowel procedures had 6-point reduction (10% vs. 16%, p = 0.05), 11-point reduction (13% vs. 24%, p = 0.05), and 16-point reduction (11% vs. 27%, p = 0.05) in 30-day readmission rates, respectively, compared to those without TTCC.

CONCLUSION

Targeted outpatient support for high-risk patients can decrease 30-day readmission rates. As our TTCC program matured, we reduced 30-day readmission in patients with lower-extremity injury, complicated tracheostomy and bowel procedures. This represents over one million-dollar savings for the hospital per year through quality-based reimbursement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, level III.

Patient Presentations in Outpatient Settings: Epidemiology of Adult Head Trauma Treated Outside of Hospital Emergency Departments

BACKGROUND

While deaths, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits for head trauma are well understood, little is known about presentations in outpatient settings. Our objective was to examine the epidemiology and extent of healthcare-seeking adult (18-64 years) head trauma patients presenting in outpatient settings compared with patients receiving nonhospitalized emergency department care.

METHODS

We used 2004-2013 MarketScan Medicaid/commercial claims to identify head trauma patients managed in outpatient settings (primary care provider, urgent care) and the emergency department. We examined differences in demographic and injury-specific factors, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined head trauma diagnoses, and extent of and reasons for postindex visit ambulatory care use within 30/90/180 days by index visit location, as well as annual and monthly variations in head trauma trends. We used outpatient incidence rates to estimate the US nationwide outpatient burden.

RESULTS

A total of 1.19 million index outpatient visits were included (emergency department: 348,659). Nationwide, they represented a weighted annual burden of 1.16 million index outpatient cases. These encompassed 46% of all known healthcare-seeking head trauma in 2013 (outpatient/emergency department/inpatient/fatalities) and increased in magnitude (+31%) from 2004 to 2013. One fourth (27%) of office/clinic visits led to diagnosis with concussion on index presentation (urgent care: 32%). Distributions of demographic factors varied with index visit location while injury-specific factors were largely comparable. Subsequent visits reflected high demand for follow-up treatment, increased concussive diagnoses, and sequelae-associated care.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult outpatient presentations of head trauma remain poorly understood. The results of this study demonstrate the extensive magnitude of their occurrence and close association with need for follow-up care.

Community Need Index (CNI): a simple tool to predict emergency department utilization after hospital discharge from the trauma service

Background

Emergency department (ED) visits after hospital discharge may reflect failure of transition of care to the outpatient setting. Reduction of postdischarge ED utilization represents an opportunity for quality improvement and cost reduction. The Community Need Index (CNI) is a Zip code-based score that accounts for a community's unmet needs with respect to healthcare and is publicly accessible via the internet. The purpose of this study was to determine if patient CNI score is associated with postdischarge ED utilization among hospitalized trauma patients.

Methods

Level 1 trauma patient admitted between January 2014 and June 2016 were stratified by 30-day postdischarge ED utilization (yes/no). CNI is a nationwide Zip code-based score (1.0-5.0) and was determined per patient from the CNI website. Higher scores indicate greater barriers to healthcare per aggregate socioeconomic factors. Patients with 30-day postdischarge ED visits were compared with those without, evaluating for differences in CNI score and clinical and demographic characteristics.

Results

309 of 3245 patients (9.5%) used the ED. The ED utilization group was older (38.3±15.7 vs. 36.3±16.4 years, p=0.034), more injured (Injury Severity Score 10.4±8.7 vs. 7.7±8.0, p<0.001), and more likely to have had in-hospital complications (17.5% vs. 5.4%, p<0.001). Adjusted for patient age, injury severity, gender, race/ethnicity, penetrating versus blunt injury, alcohol above the legal limit, illicit drug use, the presence of one or more complications and comorbidities, hospital length of stay, and insurance category, CNI score ≥4 was associated with increased utilization (OR 2.0 [95% CI 1.4 to 2.9, p<0.001]).

Discussion

CNI is an easily accessible score that independently predicts postdischarge ED utilization in trauma patients. Patients with CNI score ≥4 are at significantly increased risk. Targeted intervention concerning discharge planning for these patients represents an opportunity to decrease postdischarge ED utilization.

Level of evidence

III, Prognostic and Epidemiological.

Automated Postdischarge Trauma Patient Call Program

Postdischarge phone calls have been shown to improve communications between patients and health care providers, potentially reducing readmission rates, medication errors, and emergency department (ED) visits. Given the complexity of social and medical issues associated with trauma, we studied the utility of an automated phone call system as a method of identifying gaps in trauma care. The Trauma Program and the Health Management and Education Department at a Level 1 academic trauma center engaged in a collaborative quality improvement effort using the CipherHealth LLC platform to provide automated phone calls to trauma patients 2-3 days after discharge. Automated questions to patients focused upon symptoms, equipment and medications, discharge instruction comprehension, and follow-up needs. When indicated, the automated system sent an alert and prompted the timely return phone call to the patient from a registered nurse with the intent of addressing the specified issue. During the 4-month study period, 1,382 patients were discharged from the trauma service. Three hundred thirty-two calls were attempted, with 186 completed. Twenty-seven percent of the completed calls prompted a nurse to make a personalized callback to the patient. Most calls were for symptoms (26%), follow-up appointments (22%), medication issues (21%), and discharge instruction clarification (15%). Just over 25% of trauma patients requested further clarification after discharge from the hospital. The results of this pilot indicate that further follow-up is warranted to determine whether outpatient follow-up calls in the trauma population have any impact upon mitigating complications and quality measures such as reduced ED visits, readmission, and patient safety and satisfaction.

Teenage Trauma Patients Are at Increased Risk for Readmission for Mental Diseases and Disorders

BACKGROUND

Most studies of readmission after trauma are limited to single institutions or single states. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for readmission after trauma for mental illness including readmissions to different hospitals across the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Nationwide Readmission Database for 2013 and 2014 was queried for all patients aged 13 to 64 y with a nonelective admission for trauma and a nonelective readmission within 30 d. Multivariable logistic regression was performed for readmission for mental diseases and disorders.

RESULTS

During the study period, 53,402 patients were readmitted within 30 d after trauma. The most common major diagnostic category on readmission was mental diseases and disorders (12.1%). The age group with the highest percentage of readmissions for mental diseases and disorders was 13 to 17 y (38%). On multivariable regression, the teenage group was also the most likely to be readmitted for mental diseases and disorders compared to 18-44 y (odds ratio [OR] 0.45, P < 0.01) and 45-64 y (OR 0.24, P < 0.01). Other high-risk comorbidities included HIV infection (OR 2.4, P < 0.01), psychosis (OR 2.2, P < 0.01), drug (OR 2.0, P < 0.01), and alcohol (OR 1.4, P < 0.01) abuse.

CONCLUSIONS

Teenage trauma patients are at increased risk for hospital readmission for mental illness. Efforts to reduce these admissions should be targeted toward individuals with high-risk comorbidities such as HIV infection, psychosis, and substance abuse.

Risk Factors Associated With Emergency Department Return Visits Following Trauma System Discharge

OBJECTIVES

Little evidence exists in the pediatric trauma literature regarding what factors are associated with re-presentation to the hospital for patients discharged from the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of trauma system activations at a pediatric trauma center from June 30, 2007, through June 30, 2013, who were subsequently discharged from the ED or after a brief inpatient stay. Returns within 30 days were reviewed. χ, Student t test, and univariate logistical regression were used to compare predictive factors for those returning and not.

RESULTS

One thousand eight hundred sixty-three patient encounters were included in the cohort. Seventy-two patients (3.9%) had at least 1 return visit that was related to the original trauma activation. Age, sex, language, race/ethnicity, ED length of stay, arrival mode, level of trauma activation, and transfer from an outside hospital did not vary significantly between the groups. Patients with public insurance were almost 2 times more likely to return compared with those with private insurance (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.35). Income by zip code was associated with the risk of a return visit, with patients in neighborhoods at less than the 50th percentile income twice as likely to return to the ED (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with public insurance and those from low-income neighborhoods were significantly more likely to return to the ED after trauma system activation. These data can be used to target interventions to decrease returns in high-risk trauma patients.

Trauma Transitional Care Coordination: protecting the most vulnerable trauma patients from hospital readmission

Background

Unplanned hospital readmissions increase healthcare costs and patient morbidity. We hypothesized that a program designed to reduce trauma readmissions would be effective.

Methods

A Trauma Transitional Care Coordination (TTCC) program was created to support patients at high risk for readmission. TTCC interventions included call to patient (or caregiver) within 72 hours of discharge to identify barriers to care, complete medication reconciliation, coordination of appointments, and individualized problem solving. Information on all 30-day readmissions was collected. 30-day readmission rates were compared with center-specific readmission rates and population-based, risk-adjusted rates of readmission using published benchmarks.

Results

260 patients were enrolled in the TTCC program from January 2014 to September 2015. 30.8% (n=80) of enrollees were uninsured, 41.9% (n=109) reported current substance abuse, and 26.9% (n=70) had a current psychiatric diagnosis. 74.2% (n=193) attended outpatient trauma appointments within 14 days of discharge. 96.3% were successfully followed. Only 6.6% (n=16) of patients were readmitted in the first 30 days after discharge. This was significantly lower than both center-specific readmission rates before start of the program (6.6% vs. 11.3%, P=0.02) and recently published population-based trauma readmission rates (6.6% vs. 27%, P<0.001).

Discussion

A nursing-led TTCC program successfully followed patients and was associated with a significant decrease in 30-day readmission rates for patients with high-risk trauma. Targeted outpatient support for these most vulnerable patients can lead to better utilization of outpatient resources, increased patient satisfaction, and more consistent attainment of preinjury level of functioning or better.

Level of evidence

Level IV.

Does use of a trauma checklist increase discharges from the emergency department?

Introduction

Emergency department (ED) discharge is appropriate for patients with minor traumatic injuries. The objective of this study is to determine if use of a trauma checklist increases identification of patients with minor trauma who are safe for discharge.

Methods

Data were collected on trauma patients evaluated between 1 April 2015 and 31 January 2016 in two groups before and after introduction of a trauma checklist. The two groups were compared using age, mechanism of injury, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) using unpaired Student t-tests and Fisher’s exact test.

Results

A total of 841 trauma patients were included; 197 prior to the introduction of the checklist and 644 afterwards. Following the implementation of the trauma checklist, significantly more patients were discharged from the ED (18.2% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.0004). Discharged patients in the pre- and post-checklist groups had similar ISS (1.93 ± 1.49 vs. 1.87 ± 1.90, p = 0.90) and were of similar age (35.27 ± 11.06 vs. 41.99 years ± 18.20, p = 0.17). There was no increase in ‘bounce-backs’ to the ED in the post checklist group despite a significantly higher rate of discharge.

Conclusion

Use of a trauma checklist allows for better identification of those trauma patients who are safe to discharge from the ED and widespread use may decrease healthcare costs.

Universal Health Insurance and its association with long term outcomes in Pediatric Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in mortality exist among pediatric trauma patients; however, little is known about disparities in outcomes following discharge.

METHODS

We conducted a longitudinal cohort study of children admitted for moderate to severe trauma, covered by TRICARE from 2006 to 2014. Patients were followed up to 90days after discharge. All children <18 years with a primary trauma diagnosis, an Injury Severity Score >9 and 90days of follow-up after discharge were included. Complications, readmissions and utilization of healthcare services up to 90days after discharge were compared between Black and White patients.

RESULTS

Of the 5192 children included, majority were White (74.6%, n=3871), with 15.4% Black (n=800) and 10.0% Other (n=521). Most common injuries involved the extremities or the pelvic girdle followed by the head or neck. Complication and readmission rates were 3.6% and 8.9% within 30days of discharge respectively and 4.4% and 9.3% within 90days of discharge. 99.0% of children had at least one outpatient visit by 90days. After adjusting for patient and injury characteristics no significant differences were detected between Black and White children in outcomes after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal insurance may help mitigate disparities in post discharge care in pediatric trauma populations by increasing access to outpatient services overall and within each racial group. Further studies are required to determine the appropriate timing and frequency of follow up care in order to achieve maximum reduction in use of acute care services after discharge.

Referral patterns from emergency department to otolaryngology clinic

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with various otolaryngologic disorders are frequently referred to an otolaryngologist for follow-up care. Our aim was to further characterize this group as it has not been well described in the literature.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional retrospective study.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of patients seen during an 18-month period in an urban public hospital trauma center adult ED and referred to an otolaryngology clinic for follow-up care.

RESULTS

Seven hundred thirty-eight patients were seen and referred; the most common diagnoses made by ED providers were peripheral vertigo (12%), otitis externa (8%), and nasal fractures (8%). Nine percent of patients were evaluated during their ED visit by an otolaryngology provider. Three hundred seventy-two (50%) patients returned for their otolaryngology clinic visit; facial trauma patients were least likely to return. The most common diagnoses made by otolaryngology providers were otitis externa (12%), peripheral vertigo (12%), and nasal fractures (7%). There was 50% concordance between patients' diagnoses made by ED and otolaryngology providers. The most common differences were otitis media versus otitis externa (10%) and acute pharyngitis versus laryngopharyngeal reflux (8%). During 37% of follow-up visits, an in-office procedure was performed, most commonly flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy, cerumen removal, and nasal endoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis reports comprehensive characteristics of this referral group, identifying potential areas for improvement in patient management, resident education and efficiency. Otolaryngologists covering EDs should be familiar with this population in terms of types of cases that may affect their practices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 128:1062-1067, 2018.

Preinjury ASA score as an independent predictor of readmission after major traumatic injury

Background

Patients with trauma have a high predisposition for readmission after discharge. Unplanned solicitation of medical services is a validated quality of care indicator and is associated with considerable economic costs. While the existing literature emphasizes the severity of the injury, there is heterogeneity in defining preinjury health status. We evaluate the validity of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status score as an independent predictor of readmission and compare it to the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

Methods

This is a single center, retrospective cohort study based on adult patients (>18 years of age) with trauma admitted to the Ottawa Hospital from January 1, 2004 to November 1, 2014. A multivariate logistic regression model is used to control for confounding and assess individual predictors. Outcome is readmission to hospital within 30 days, 3 months and 6 months.

Results

A total of 4732 adult patients were included in this analysis. Readmission rates were 6.5%, 9.6% and 11.8% for 30 days, 3 months and 6 months, respectively. Higher preinjury ASA scores demonstrated significantly increased risk of readmission across all levels in a dose-dependent manner for all time frames. The effect of preinjury ASA scores on readmission is most striking at 30 days, with patients demonstrating a 2.81 (1.88–4.22, P<0.0001), 3.59 (2.43–5.32, P<0.0001) and 7.52 (4.72–11.99, P<0.0001) fold odds of readmission for ASA class 2, 3 and 4, respectively, as compared with healthy ASA class 1 patients. The ASA scores outperformed the CCI at 30 days and 3 months.

Conclusions

The preinjury ASA score is a strong independent predictor of readmission after traumatic injury. In comparison to the CCI, the preinjury ASA score was a better predictor of readmission at 3 and 6 months after a major traumatic injury.

Level of Evidence

Prognostic and Epidemiological Study, Level III.

Risk factors and costs associated with nationwide nonelective readmission after trauma

BACKGROUND

Most prior studies of readmission after trauma have been limited to single institutions, whereas multi-institutional studies have been limited to single states and an inability to distinguish between elective and nonelective readmissions. The purpose of this study was to identify the risk factors and costs associated with nonelective readmission after trauma across the United States.

METHODS

The Nationwide Readmission Database was queried for all patients with nonelective admissions in 2013 and 2014 with a primary diagnosis of trauma. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression identified risk factors for 30-day nonelective same- and different-hospital readmission. The diagnosis groups on readmission were evaluated, and the total cost of readmissions was calculated.

RESULTS

There were 1,180,144 patients admitted for trauma, the 30-day readmission rate was 9.4%, and 26.4% of readmissions occurred at a different hospital. The median readmission cost for patients readmitted to the same hospital was $8,298 (interquartile range, $4,899-$14,911), whereas the median readmission cost for patients readmitted to a different hospital was $8,568 (interquartile range, $4,935-$16,078; p < 0.01). Multivariate regression revealed that patients discharged against medical advice were at increased risk of readmission (odds ratio, 2.79; p < 0.01) and readmission to a different facility (odds ratio, 1.58; p < 0.01). Home health care was associated with a decreased risk of readmission to a different hospital (odds ratio, 0.74; p < 0.01). Septicemia and disseminated infections were the most common diagnoses on readmission (8.4%) and readmission to a different hospital (8.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant portion of US readmissions occur at different hospitals with implications for continuity of care, quality metrics, cost, and resource allocation. Home health care reduces the likelihood of nonelective readmission to a different hospital. Infection was the most common reason for readmission, with ramifications for outcomes research and quality improvement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Care management/epidimeological, level IV.

Outpatient follow-up does not prevent emergency department utilization by trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Although most trauma centers have a regularly scheduled trauma clinic, research demonstrates that trauma patients do not consistently attend follow-up appointments and often use the emergency department (ED) for outpatient care.

METHODS

A retrospective review of outpatient follow-up of adult patients admitted to the trauma service (January 2014-December 2014) at an urban level I trauma center was conducted (n = 2134).

RESULTS

A total of 219 patients (10%) were evaluated in trauma clinic after discharge from the hospital. Twenty-one percent of patients seen in trauma clinic visited the ED within 30 d compared with 12% of those not seen in clinic (P < 0.001). A total of 104 patients were readmitted within 30 d of discharge; no difference existed in the rate of hospital readmission between patients seen in clinic and those not seen in clinic (P = 0.25). Stepwise logistic regression showed that clinic follow-up was not a significant predictor of decreased ED utilization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.16 [95% confidence interval 0.78-1.72], P = 0.461) and also showed that while ED use was a significant predictor of readmission (adjusted OR 216 [93-500], P < 0.001), clinic visits were not (adjusted OR 0.74 [0.33-1.69], P = 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient follow-up in the trauma clinic does not decrease ED utilization or hospital readmissions indicating that interventions aimed at improving access to a conventional outpatient clinic will not impact ED utilization rates. Further study is necessary to determine the best system for providing clinically appropriate and cost-effective outpatient follow-up for trauma patients.

Trauma advanced practice provider programme development in an academic setting to optimize care coordination

Background

Benchmark data from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) identified an opportunity for improvement in our trauma programme. Our unexpected return to the intensive care unit (ICU) was found to be higher than the national averages and we also noticed that our readmission rate had increased. We chose to address these complications as continuous quality improvement projects. It was hypothesized that restructuring the workflow of the trauma advanced practice providers (APPs) to focus on the delivery of comprehensive clinical care would decrease return to ICU and readmission rates of trauma patients.

Methods

The development of the APP programme occurred from 2012 to 2014. First, APP daily shifts were extended to mirror the resident physicians’ coverage. Second, the APPs’ original job description was expanded from ‘task-oriented’ workflow to providing comprehensive clinical care. Third, the APPs were involved in the evaluation and decision-making process for transferring trauma patients from the ICU. Finally, the APPs implemented a new discharge process that included all information in a standardized format and a follow-up phone call 24–48 hours after discharge. The trauma registry at our verified, academic level I trauma center was use to assess our ICU and hospital readmission rates during the time we instituted the new APP workflow programme.

Results

In 2012, our ICU readmission rate was 5.7% (TQIP=1.9%) but then decreased to 4.4% in 2013 (TQIP=2.5%) and 2.1% in 2014 (TQIP=2.8%). Our hospital readmission rate was 2.0% in 2012 but then decreased to 1.38% and 0.96% over the next 2 years.

Conclusions

After extending the APP service coverage, implementing a comprehensive clinical care model and standardizing the discharge process, our unplanned return to ICU rates have decreased to below the TQIP national average and hospital readmission rates have also decreased by half.

Level of evidence

III.

Impact of socio-economic status on unplanned readmission following injury: A multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Unplanned readmissions cost the US economy approximately $17 billion in 2009 with a 30-day incidence of 19.6%. Despite the recognised impact of socio-economic status (SES) on readmission in diagnostic populations such as cardiovascular patients, its impact in trauma patients is unclear. We examined the effect of SES on unplanned readmission following injury in a setting with universal health insurance. We also evaluated whether additional adjustment for SES influenced risk-adjusted readmission rates, used as a quality indicator (QI).

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a multicenter cohort study in an integrated Canadian trauma system involving 56 adult trauma centres using trauma registry and hospital discharge data collected between 2005 and 2010. The main outcome was unplanned 30-day readmission; all cause, due to complications of injury and due to subsequent injury. SES was determined using ecological indices of material and social deprivation. Odds ratios of readmission and 95% confidence intervals adjusted for covariates were generated using multivariable logistic regression with a correction for hospital clusters. We then compared a readmission QI validated previously (original QI) to a QI with additional adjustment for SES (SES-adjusted QI) using the mean absolute difference.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 52,122 trauma admissions of which 6.5% were rehospitalised within 30 days of discharge. Compared to patients in the lowest quintile of social deprivation, those in the highest quintile had a 20% increase in the odds of all-cause unplanned readmission (95% CI=1.06-1.36) and a 27% increase in the odds of readmission due to complications of injury (95% CI=1.04-1.54). No association was observed for material deprivation or for readmissions due to subsequent injuries. We observed a strong agreement between the original and SES-adjusted readmission (mean absolute difference= 0.04%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients admitted for traumatic injury who suffer from social deprivation have an increased risk of unplanned rehospitalisation due to complications of injury in the 30 days following discharge. Better discharge planning or follow up for such patients may improve patient outcome and resource use for trauma admissions. Despite observed associations, results suggest that the trauma QI based on unplanned readmission does not require additional adjustment for SES.

Hospital Readmission Through the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Hospital readmission places a high burden on both health care systems and patients. Most readmissions are thought to be related to the quality of the health care system.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine the causes and rates of early readmission in emergency department in a Tehran hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional investigation was performed to study readmission of inpatients at a large academic hospital in Tehran, Iran. Patients admitted to hospital from July 1, 2014 to December 30, 2014 via the emergency department were enrolled. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the distribution demographics in the sample. Data was analyzed by chi2 test using SPSS 20 software.

RESULTS

The main cause of readmission was complications related to surgical procedures (31.0%). Discharge from hospital based on patient request at the patient's own risk was a risk factor for emergency readmission in 8.5%, a very small number were readmitted after complete treatment (0.6%). The only direct complication of treatment was infection (17%).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative complications increase the probability of patients returning to hospital. Physicians, nurses, etc., should focus on these specific patient populations to minimize the risk of postoperative complications. Future studies should assess the relative connections of various types of patient information (e.g., social and psychosocial factors) to readmission risk prediction by comparing the performance of models with and without this information in a specific population.

Census-based socioeconomic indicators for monitoring injury causes in the USA: a review

BACKGROUND

Unlike the UK or New Zealand, there is no standard set of census variables in the USA for characterising socioeconomic (SES, socioeconomic status) inequalities in health outcomes, including injury. We systematically reviewed existing US studies to identify conceptual and methodological strengths and limitations of current approaches to determine those most suitable for research and surveillance.

METHODS

We searched seven electronic databases to identify census variables proposed in the peer-reviewed literature to monitor injury risk. Inclusion criteria were that numerator data were derived from hospital, trauma or vital statistics registries and that exposure variables included census SES constructs.

RESULTS

From 33 eligible studies, we identified 70 different census constructs for monitoring injury risk. Of these, fewer than half were replicated by other studies or against other causes, making the majority of studies non-comparable. When evaluated for a statistically significant relationship with a cause of injury, 74% of all constructs were predictive of injury risk when assessed in pairwise comparisons, whereas 98% of all constructs were significant when aggregated into composite indices. Fewer than 30% of studies selected SES constructs based on known associations with injury risk.

CONCLUSIONS

There is heterogeneity in the conceptual and methodological approaches for using census data for monitoring injury risk as well as in the recommendations as to how these constructs can be used for injury prevention. We recommend four priority areas for research to facilitate a more unified approach towards use of the census for monitoring socioeconomic inequalities in injury risk.

Outpatient follow-up after traumatic injury: Challenges and opportunities

Background:

It has been shown that rates of ambulatory follow-up after traumatic injury are not optimal, but the association with insurance status has not been studied.

Aims:

To describe trauma patient characteristics associated with completed follow-up after hospitalization and to compare relative rates of healthcare utilization across payor types.

Setting and Design:

Single institution retrospective cohort study.

Materials and Methods:

We compared patient demographics and healthcare utilization behavior after discharge among trauma patients between April 1, 2005 and April 1, 2010. Our primary outcome of interest was outpatient provider contact within 2 months of discharge.

Statistical Analysis:

Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the association between characteristics including insurance status and subsequent ambulatory and acute care.

Results:

We reviewed the records of 2906 sequential trauma patients. Patients with Medicaid and those without insurance were significantly less likely to complete scheduled outpatient follow-up within 2 months, compared to those with private insurance (Medicaid, OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.88; uninsured, OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.23-0.36). Uninsured and Medicaid patients were twice as likely as privately insured patients to visit the Emergency Department (ED) for any reason after discharge (uninsured patients (Medicaid, OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.50-4.53; uninsured, OR 2.10, 94% CI 1.31-3.36).

Conclusion:

We found marked differences between patients in scheduled outpatient follow-up and ED utilization after injury associated with insurance status; however, Medicaid seemed to obviate some of this disparity. Medicaid expansion may improve outpatient follow-up and affect patient outcome disparities after injury.

Early unplanned hospital readmission after acute traumatic injury: the experience at a state-designated level-I trauma center

BACKGROUND

There is limited literature on early unplanned hospital readmission after acute traumatic injury, especially at suburban facilities.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the trauma registry at a suburban, state-designated, level-I academic trauma center from July 2009 to June 2012 was performed for all admitted (≥24 hours) adult (age ≥18 years) trauma patients who were discharged alive, including unplanned readmissions within 30 days of discharge.

RESULTS

Of 3,622 admitted adult trauma patients, 6.57% were readmitted at a median of 9 days. Major surgery was required in 15.9% patients on readmission. The mortality rate at readmission was 4.6%. Multiple factors were associated with readmission on univariate analysis; however, on multivariate analysis, only major comorbidities (odds ratio [OR], 1.53), hospital length of stay (OR, 1.01), abdominal Abbreviated Injury Score greater than or equal to 3 (OR, 2.10), and discharge to a skilled nursing facility or subacute facility (OR, 1.56) were significant predictors. Meanwhile, index admission to surgical services was associated with a significantly lower readmission risk (OR, .60).

CONCLUSIONS

Trauma patients are infrequently readmitted. Index admission to a surgical service reduces the risk of readmission. Earlier medical follow-up should be considered.

Association between intentional injury and long-term survival after trauma

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk-adjusted mortality of intentionally injured patients within 7 to 9 years postinjury, compared with unintentionally injured patients.

BACKGROUND

Violent injury contributes significantly to trauma mortality in the United States. Homicide is the second leading killer of American youth, aged 15 to 24 years. Long-term survival among intentionally injured patients has not been well studied. It is also unknown whether intentionally injured patients have worse long-term survival compared with unintentionally or accidentally injured patients with equivalent injuries.

METHODS

Adult trauma patients admitted for 24 hours or more and discharged alive from the Johns Hopkins Hospital from January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2000, were included. The primary outcome was mortality within 7 to 9 years postinjury. Long-term patient survival was determined using the National Death Index. The association between injury intentionality and mortality was investigated using a Cox proportional hazard regression model, adjusted for confounders such as injury severity and patient race, socioeconomic status, and comorbid conditions. Overall differences in survival between those with intentional versus unintentional injury were also determined by comparing adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

RESULTS

A total of 2062 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 56.4% were intentionally injured and 43.6% were unintentionally injured. Compared with unintentionally injured patients, intentionally injured patients were younger and more often male and from a zip code with low median household income. Approximately 15% of all patients had died within 7 to 9 years of follow-up. Older age and presence of comorbidities were associated with this outcome; however, intentional injury was not found to be significantly associated with long-term mortality rates. There was also no significant difference in survival curves between groups; intentionally injured patients were much more likely to die of a subsequent injury, whereas those with unintentional injury commonly died of noninjury causes.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in mortality between intentionally injured and unintentionally injured patients within 7 to 9 years postinjury. These results confirm the long-term effectiveness of lifesaving trauma care for those with intentional injury. However, given that patients with intentional injuries were more likely to suffer a subsequent violent death, interventions focused on breaking the cycle of violence are needed.

Rates, patterns, and determinants of unplanned readmission after traumatic injury: a multicenter cohort study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to (i) describe unplanned readmission rates after injury according to time, reason, and place; (ii) compare observed rates with general population rates, and (iii) identify determinants of 30-day readmission.

BACKGROUND

Hospital readmissions represent an important burden in terms of mortality, morbidity, and resource use but information on unplanned rehospitalization after injury admissions is scarce.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective cohort study was based on adults discharged alive from a Canadian provincial trauma system (1998-2010; n = 115,329). Trauma registry data were linked to hospital discharge data to obtain information on readmission up to 12 months postdischarge. Provincial admission rates were matched to study data by age and gender to obtain expected rates. Determinants of readmission were identified using multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Cumulative readmission rates at 30 days, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months were 5.9%, 10.9%, 15.5%, and 21.1%, respectively. Observed rates persisted above expected rates up to 11 months postdischarge. Thirty percent of 30-day readmissions were due to potential complications of injury compared with 3% for general provincial admissions. Only 23% of readmissions were to the same hospital. The strongest independent predictors of readmission were the number of prior admissions, discharge destination, the number of comorbidities, and age.

CONCLUSIONS

Unplanned readmissions after discharge from acute care for traumatic injury are frequent, persist beyond 30 days, and are often related to potential complications of injury. Several patient-, injury-, and hospital-related factors are associated with the risk of readmission. Injury readmission rates should be monitored as part of trauma quality assurance efforts.

Early hospital readmission in the trauma population: are the risk factors different?

INTRODUCTION

Hospital readmission rates will soon impact Medicare reimbursements. While risk factors for readmission have been described for medical and elective surgical patients, little is known about their predictive value specifically in trauma patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified all admissions after trauma resuscitation to our urban level 1 trauma centre from 1/1/2004 to 8/31/2010. All patients discharged alive were included. Data collected included demographics, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and length of stay (LOS). We analyzed these index admissions for the development of complications that have previously been shown to be associated with readmission. Readmissions that occurred within 30 days of index admission were identified. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. p<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

We identified 10,306 index admissions, with 447 (4.3%) early (within 30 days) readmissions. Mean ISS was 11.1 (SD 10.4). On multivariable analysis, African-American race (OR 1.3, p=0.009), pre-existing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (OR 1.5, p=0.02), and diabetes mellitus (OR 1.8, p<0.001) were associated with readmission, along with higher ISS (OR 1.01, p<0.001), ICU admission (OR 2.1, p<0.001), and increased LOS (OR 1.01, p<0.001). Among many in-hospital complications examined, only the development of surgical site infection (SSI) (OR 1.9, p=0.02) was associated with increased risk of readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Trauma patients have a low risk of readmission. In contrast to elective surgical patients, the only modifiable risk factor for readmission in our trauma population was SSI. Other risk factors may present clinicians with opportunities for targeted interventions, such as proactive follow up or early phone contact. With future changes to health care policy, clinicians may have even greater motivation to prevent readmission.

The impact of Massachusetts health care reform on an orthopedic hand service

PURPOSE

The impact of Massachusetts health care reform on the burden of uninsured orthopedic care is unclear. We examined the patient population at an academic orthopedic hand surgery practice based in an inner city, level 1 trauma center as a model. We hypothesized that the percentage of overall encounters with uninsured patients would decrease and that the percentages of overall encounters with privately insured and MassHealth (Medicaid) patients would increase.

METHODS

We retrospectively tallied the insurance type of all patient encounters from 2004 to 2011 for an academic orthopedic hand surgery practice. Charity care and self pay constituted the uninsured group. Insurance types that do not offer patients a choice in enrollment, such as Medicare and motor vehicle insurance, were excluded. Non-Massachusetts residents were excluded. July 1, 2007, was used as the reference date for the implementation of reform policies. Paired t-tests and change-point linear regressions were performed.

RESULTS

The overall percentage of encounters with uninsured patients declined by approximately 2%, and the overall percentage of encounters with privately insured patients increased by approximately 3.5%, both significant changes. No significant change in MassHealth (Medicaid) was observed. Change-point linear regression revealed that privately insured encounters increased rapidly after reform but that levels have remained roughly the same since. The uninsured population was already decreasing slightly between 2004 and 2007, at a rate of approximately 0.08% per month, but it also leveled off after 2007.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the burden of uninsured encounters on our service was reduced by a statistically significant decrease of approximately one-half. This was accompanied by a significant increase in encounters with privately insured patients. No significant change in the number of MassHealth encounters occurred.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic/Decision Analysis IV.

Timing and causes of death after injuries

Currently, long-term outcomes are significant because health care system changes will likely lead to a single payment for each occurrence of care, including readmissions-the "bundled payment" system. Therefore, it is essential to understand the outcomes of trauma patients discharged alive from trauma centers. This article reviews the current knowledge base on the timing and causes of deaths after trauma. The trimodal mortality model (immediate deaths, early deaths, and late deaths) is utilized as the early research describing trimodal distribution is discussed. Also covered is the successive work as trauma systems matured, showing a shift toward a bimodal distribution with a decline in late deaths. Finally, studies of long-term outcomes are highlighted. Deaths occurring within minutes or a few hours of injury are largely unchanged, which underscores the enormity of injuries to the central nervous and cardiovascular systems. Late deaths caused by multiple organ failure and sepsis have declined considerably, however. Also, the causes of death in this patient population remain constant. Lastly, a considerable number of deaths after discharge may be due to nontraumatic causes.