Hospital-, Anesthesiologist-, and Patient-level Variation in Primary Anesthesia Type for Hip Fracture Surgery

Factors Associated With Decision to Use and Dosing of Sugammadex in Children: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Sugammadex was initially approved for reversal of neuromuscular blockade in adults in the United States in 2015. Limited data suggest sugammadex is widely used in pediatric anesthesia practice however the factors influencing use are not known. We explore patient, surgical, and institutional factors associated with the decision to use sugammadex versus neostigmine or no reversal, and the decision to use 2 mg/kg vs 4 mg/kg dosing.

METHODS

Using data from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) database, an EHR-derived registry, we conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study. Eligible cases were performed between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020, for children 0 to 17 years at US hospitals. Cases involved general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation and administration of rocuronium or vecuronium. Using generalized linear mixed models with institution and anesthesiologist-specific random intercepts, we measured the importance of a variety of patient, clinician, institution, anesthetic, and surgical risk factors in the decision to use sugammadex versus neostigmine, and the decision to use a 2 mg/kg vs 4 mg/kg dose. We then used intraclass correlation statistics to evaluate the proportion of variance contributed by institution and anesthesiologist specifically.

RESULTS

There were 97,654 eligible anesthetics across 30 institutions. Of these 47.1% received sugammadex, 43.1% received neostigmine, and 9.8% received no reversal agent. Variability in the choice to use sugammadex was attributable primarily to institution (40.4%) and attending anesthesiologist (27.1%). Factors associated with sugammadex use (compared to neostigmine) include time from first institutional use of sugammadex (odds ratio [OR], 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.09, per month, P < .001), younger patient age groups (0-27 days OR, 2.59 [2.00-3.34], P < .001; 28 days-1 year OR, 2.72 [2.16-3.43], P < .001 vs 12-17 years), increased American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] physical status (ASA III: OR, 1.32 [1.23-1.42], P < .001 ASA IV OR, 1.71 [1.46-2.00], P < .001 vs ASA I), neuromuscular disease (OR, 1.14 (1.04-1.26], P = .006), cardiac surgery (OR, 1.76 [1.40-2.22], P < .001), dose of neuromuscular blockade within the hour before reversal (>2 ED95s/kg OR, 4.58 (4.14-5.07], P < .001 vs none), and shorter case duration (case duration <60 minutes OR, 2.06 [1.75-2.43], P < .001 vs >300 minutes).

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in sugammadex use was primarily explained by institution and attending anesthesiologist. Patient factors associated with the decision to use sugammadex included younger age, higher doses of neuromuscular blocking agents, and increased medical complexity.

Opioid Dose Variation in Cardiac Surgery: A Multicenter Study of Practice

BACKGROUND

Although high-opioid anesthesia was long the standard for cardiac surgery, some anesthesiologists now favor multimodal analgesia and low-opioid anesthetic techniques. The typical cardiac surgery opioid dose is unclear, and the degree to which patients, anesthesiologists, and institutions influence this opioid dose is unknown.

METHODS

We reviewed data from nonemergency adult cardiac surgeries requiring cardiopulmonary bypass performed at 30 academic and community hospitals within the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group registry from 2014 through 2021. Intraoperative opioid administration was measured in fentanyl equivalents. We used hierarchical linear modeling to attribute opioid dose variation to the institution where each surgery took place, the primary attending anesthesiologist, and the specifics of the surgical patient and case.

RESULTS

Across 30 hospitals, 794 anesthesiologists, and 59,463 cardiac cases, patients received a mean of 1139 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1132-1146) fentanyl mcg equivalents of opioid, and doses varied widely (standard deviation [SD], 872 µg). The most frequently used opioids were fentanyl (86% of cases), sufentanil (16% of cases), hydromorphone (12% of cases), and morphine (3% of cases). 0.6% of cases were opioid-free. 60% of dose variation was explainable by institution and anesthesiologist. The median difference in opioid dose between 2 randomly selected anesthesiologists across all institutions was 600 µg of fentanyl (interquartile range [IQR], 283-1023 µg). An anesthesiologist's intraoperative opioid dose was strongly correlated with their frequency of using a sufentanil infusion (r = 0.81), but largely uncorrelated with their use of nonopioid analgesic techniques (|r| < 0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose opioids predominate in cardiac surgery, with substantial dose variation from case to case. Much of this variation is attributable to practice variability rather than patient or surgical differences. This suggests an opportunity to optimize opioid use in cardiac surgery.

Exploring Differences in Intraoperative Medication Use Between African American and Non-Hispanic White Patients During General Anesthesia: Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

This study aimed to explore whether differences exist in anesthesia care providers' use of intraoperative medication between African American and non-Hispanic White patients in adult surgical patients who underwent noncardiothoracic nonobstetric surgeries with general anesthesia. A retrospective observational cohort study used electronic health records between January 1, 2018 and August 31, 2019 at a large academic health system in the southeastern United States. To evaluate the isolated impact of race on intraoperative medication use, inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity scores was used to balance the covariates between African American and non-Hispanic White patients. Regression analyses were then performed to evaluate the impact of race on the total dose of opioid analgesia administered, and the use of midazolam, sugammadex, antihypotensive drugs, and antihypertensive drugs. Of the 31,790 patients included in the sample, 58.9% were non-Hispanic Whites and 13.6% were African American patients. After adjusting for significant covariates, African American patients were more likely to receive midazolam premedication (p < .0001; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.17, 99.9% CI [1.06, 1.30]), and antihypertensive drugs (p = .0002; aOR = 1.15, 99.9% CI [1.02, 1.30]), and less likely to receive antihypotensive drugs (p < .0001; aOR = 0.85, 99.9% CI [0.76, 0.95]) than non-Hispanic White patients. However, we did not find significant differences in the total dose of opioid analgesia administered, or sugammadex. This study identified differences in intraoperative anesthesia care delivery between African American and non-Hispanic White patients; however, future research is needed to understand mechanisms that contribute to these differences and whether these differences are associated with patient outcomes.

Racial and ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia in the United States: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic disparities exist in the delivery of regional anesthesia in the United States. Anesthesiologists have ethical and economic obligations to address existing disparities in regional anesthesia care.

OBJECTIVES

Current evidence of racial and ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia utilization in adult patients in the United States is presented. Potential contributors and solutions to racial disparities are also discussed.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Literature search was performed for studies examining racial and ethnic disparities in utilization of regional anesthesia, including neuraxial anesthesia and/or peripheral nerve blocks.

FINDINGS

While minoritized patients are generally less likely to receive regional anesthesia than white patients, the pattern of disparities for different racial/ethnic groups and for types of regional anesthetics can be complex and varied. Contributors to racial/ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia span hospital, provider, and patient-level factors. Potential solutions include standardization of regional anesthetic practices via Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways, increasing patient education, health literacy, language translation services, and improving diversity and cultural competency in the anesthesiology workforce.

CONCLUSION

Racial and ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia exist. Contributors and solutions to these disparities are multifaceted. Much work remains within the subspecialty of regional anesthesia to identify and address such disparities.

Days alive and at home after hip fracture: a cross-sectional validation of a patient-centred outcome measure using routinely collected data

BACKGROUND

Days alive and at home (DAH) is a patient centered outcome measureable in routinely collected health data. The validity and minimally important difference (MID) in hip fracture have not been evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed construct and predictive validity and estimated a MID for the patient-centred outcome of DAH after hip fracture admission.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional observational study using linked health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. DAH was calculated as the number of days alive within 90 days of admission minus the number of days hospitalised or institutionalised. All hospital admissions (2012-2018) for hip fracture in adults aged >50 years were included. Construct validity analyses used Bayesian quantile regression to estimate the associations of postulated patient, admission and process-related variables with DAH. The predictive validity assessed was the correlation of DAH in 90 days with the value from 91 to 365 days; and the association and discrimination of DAH in 90 days predicting subsequent mortality. MID was estimated by averaging distribution-based and clinical anchor-based estimates.

RESULTS

We identified 63 778 patients with hip fracture. The median number of DAH was 43 (range 0-87). In the 90 days after admission, 8050 (12.6%) people died; a further 6366 (10.0%) died from days 91 to 365. Associations between patient-level and admission-level factors with the median DAH (lower with greater age, frailty and comorbidity, lower if admitted to intensive care or having had a complication) supported construct validity. DAH in 90 days after admission was strongly correlated with DAH in 365 days after admission (r=0.922). An 11-day MID was estimated.

CONCLUSION

DAH has face, construct and predictive validity as a patient-centred outcome in patients with hip fracture, with an estimated MID of 11 days. Future research is required to include direct patient perspectives in confirming MID.

A survey of surgical patients' perspectives and preferences towards general anesthesia techniques and shared-decision making

BACKGROUND

The decision about which type of general anesthetic to administer is typically made by the clinical team without patient engagement. This study examined patients' preferences, experiences, attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and perceived social norms about anesthesia and about engaging in the decision regarding general anesthetic choice with their clinician.

METHODS

We conducted a survey in the United States, sent to a panel of surgical patients through Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) from March 2022 through May 2022. Questions were developed based on the Theory of Planned Behavior and validated measures were used when available. A patient partner who had experienced both intravenous and inhaled anesthesia contributed to the development and refinement of the questions.

RESULTS

A total of 806 patients who received general anesthesia for an elective procedure in the last five years completed the survey. 43% of respondents preferred a patient-led decision making role and 28% preferred to share decision making with their clinical team, yet only 7.8% reported being engaged in full shared decision making about the anesthesia they received. Intraoperative awareness, pain, nausea, vomiting and quickly returning to work and usual household activities were important to respondents. Waking up in the middle of surgery was the most commonly reported concern, despite this experience being reported only 8% of the time. Most patients (65%) who searched for information about general anesthesia noted that it took a lot of effort to find the information, and 53% agreed to feeling frustrated during the search.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients prefer a patient-led or shared decision making process when it comes to their anesthetic care and want to be engaged in the decision. However, only a small percentage of patients reported being fully engaged in the decision. Further studies should inform future shared decision-making tools, informed consent materials, educational materials and framing of anesthetic choices for patients so that they are able to make a choice regarding the anesthetic they receive.

Patient-, Clinician-, and Institution-level Variation in Inotrope Use for Cardiac Surgery: A Multicenter Observational Analysis

BACKGROUND

Conflicting evidence exists regarding the risks and benefits of inotropic therapies during cardiac surgery, and the extent of variation in clinical practice remains understudied. Therefore, the authors sought to quantify patient-, anesthesiologist-, and hospital-related contributions to variation in inotrope use.

METHODS

In this observational study, nonemergent adult cardiac surgeries using cardiopulmonary bypass were reviewed across a multicenter cohort of academic and community hospitals from 2014 to 2019. Patients who were moribund, receiving mechanical circulatory support, or receiving preoperative or home inotropes were excluded. The primary outcome was an inotrope infusion (epinephrine, dobutamine, milrinone, dopamine) administered for greater than 60 consecutive min intraoperatively or ongoing upon transport from the operating room. Institution-, clinician-, and patient-level variance components were studied.

RESULTS

Among 51,085 cases across 611 attending anesthesiologists and 29 hospitals, 27,033 (52.9%) cases received at least one intraoperative inotrope, including 21,796 (42.7%) epinephrine, 6,360 (12.4%) milrinone, 2,000 (3.9%) dobutamine, and 602 (1.2%) dopamine (non-mutually exclusive). Variation in inotrope use was 22.6% attributable to the institution, 6.8% attributable to the primary attending anesthesiologist, and 70.6% attributable to the patient. The adjusted median odds ratio for the same patient receiving inotropes was 1.73 between 2 randomly selected clinicians and 3.55 between 2 randomly selected institutions. Factors most strongly associated with increased likelihood of inotrope use were institutional medical school affiliation (adjusted odds ratio, 6.2; 95% CI, 1.39 to 27.8), heart failure (adjusted odds ratio, 2.60; 95% CI, 2.46 to 2.76), pulmonary circulation disorder (adjusted odds ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.58 to 1.87), loop diuretic home medication (adjusted odds ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.42 to 1.69), Black race (adjusted odds ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.68), and digoxin home medication (adjusted odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in inotrope use during cardiac surgery is attributable to the institution and to the clinician, in addition to the patient. Variation across institutions and clinicians suggests a need for future quantitative and qualitative research to understand variation in inotrope use affecting outcomes and develop evidence-based, patient-centered inotrope therapies.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Feasibility pilot trial for the Trajectories of Recovery after Intravenous propofol versus inhaled VolatilE anesthesia (THRIVE) pragmatic randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Millions of patients receive general anaesthesia for surgery annually. Crucial gaps in evidence exist regarding which technique, propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) or inhaled volatile anaesthesia (INVA), yields superior patient experience, safety and outcomes. The aim of this pilot study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a large comparative effectiveness trial assessing patient experiences and outcomes after receiving propofol TIVA or INVA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol was cocreated by a diverse team, including patient partners with personal experience of TIVA or INVA. The design is a 300-patient, two-centre, randomised, feasibility pilot trial. Patients 18 years of age or older, undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery requiring general anaesthesia with a tracheal tube or laryngeal mask airway will be eligible. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to propofol TIVA or INVA, stratified by centre and procedural complexity. The feasibility endpoints include: (1) proportion of patients approached who agree to participate; (2) proportion of patients who receive their assigned randomised treatment; (3) completeness of outcomes data collection and (4) feasibility of data management procedures. Proportions and 95% CIs will be calculated to assess whether prespecified thresholds are met for the feasibility parameters. If the lower bounds of the 95% CI are above the thresholds of 10% for the proportion of patients agreeing to participate among those approached and 80% for compliance with treatment allocation for each randomised treatment group, this will suggest that our planned pragmatic 12 500-patient comparative effectiveness trial can likely be conducted successfully. Other feasibility outcomes and adverse events will be described.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is approved by the ethics board at Washington University (IRB# 202205053), serving as the single Institutional Review Board for both participating sites. Recruitment began in September 2022. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, internet-based educational materials and mass media.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05346588.

Predictors of Intraoperative Echocardiography: Analysis of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is associated with improved outcomes after cardiac surgery, but unexplained practice pattern variation exists. This study aimed to identify and quantify the predictors of intraoperative TEE use among patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) or cardiac valve surgery.

METHODS

This observational cohort study used The Society of Thoracic Surgeon (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database data to identify and quantify the predictors of intraoperative TEE use among adult patients aged 18 years or more undergoing either isolated CABG or open cardiac valve repair or replacement surgery between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2019. Generalized linear mixed models were used to measure the relationship between intraoperative TEE and patient characteristics, surgical volume, and geographic location, while accounting for clustering within hospitals (primary analysis) or surgeons (secondary analysis).

RESULTS

Of 1,973,655 patients, 1,365,708 underwent isolated CABG and 607,947 underwent cardiac valve surgery. Overall, intraoperative TEE was used in 62% of surgeries. The primary hospital-level generalized linear mixed models analysis demonstrated that the strongest predictor of intraoperative TEE use was the hospital where the surgery occurred-with a median odds ratio for TEE of 10.13 in isolated CABG and 5.30 in cardiac valve surgery. The secondary surgeon-level generalized linear mixed models analysis demonstrated similar findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative TEE use (vs lack of use) during surgery was more strongly associated with hospital and surgeon practice patterns than with any patient-level factor, surgical volume, or geographic location.

Hospital-, Anesthesiologist-, Surgeon-, and Patient-Level Variations in Neuraxial Anesthesia Use for Lower Limb Revascularization Surgery: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Although neuraxial anesthesia may promote improved outcomes for patients undergoing lower limb revascularization surgery, its use is decreasing over time. Our objective was to estimate variation in neuraxial (versus general) anesthesia use for lower limb revascularization at the hospital, anesthesiologist, surgeon, and patient levels, which could inform strategies to increase uptake.

METHODS

Following protocol registration, we conducted a historical cross-sectional analysis of population-based linked health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. All adults undergoing lower limb revascularization surgery between 2009 and 2018 were identified. Generalized linear models with binomial response distributions, logit links and random intercepts for hospitals, anesthesiologists, and surgeons were used to estimate the variation in neuraxial anesthesia use at the hospital, anesthesiologist, surgeon, and patient levels using variance partition coefficients and median odds ratios. Patient- and hospital-level predictors of neuraxial anesthesia use were identified.

RESULTS

We identified 11,849 patients; 3489 (29.4%) received neuraxial anesthesia. The largest proportion of variation was attributable to the hospital level (50.3%), followed by the patient level (35.7%); anesthesiologists and surgeons had small attributable variation (11.3% and 2.8%, respectively). Mean odds ratio estimates suggested that 2 similar patients would experience a 5.7-fold difference in their odds of receiving a neuraxial anesthetic were they randomly sent to 2 different hospitals. Results were consistent in sensitivity analyses, including limiting analysis to patients with diagnosed peripheral artery disease and separately to those aged >66 years with complete prescription anticoagulant and antiplatelet usage data.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuraxial anesthesia use primarily varies at the hospital level. Efforts to promote use of neuraxial anesthesia for lower limb revascularization should likely focus on the hospital context.

The influence of mode of anaesthesia on perioperative outcomes in people with hip fracture: a prospective cohort study from the National Hip Fracture Database for England, Wales and Northern Ireland

BACKGROUND

Delirium is common after hip fracture surgery, affecting up to 50% of patients. The incidence of delirium may be influenced by mode and conduct of anaesthesia. We examined the effect of spinal anaesthesia (with and without sedation) compared with general anaesthesia on early outcomes following hip fracture surgery, including delirium.

METHODS

We used prospective data on 107,028 patients (2018 to 2019) from the National Hip Fracture Database, which records all hip fractures in patients aged 60 years and over in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Patients were grouped by anaesthesia: general (58,727; 55%), spinal without sedation (31,484; 29%), and spinal with sedation (16,817; 16%). Outcomes (4AT score on post-operative delirium screening; mobilisation day one post-operatively; length of hospital stay; discharge destination; 30-day mortality) were compared between anaesthetic groups using multivariable logistic and linear regression models.

RESULTS

Compared with general anaesthesia, spinal anaesthesia without sedation (but not spinal with sedation) was associated with a significantly reduced risk of delirium (odds ratio (OR)=0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.92-0.98), increased likelihood of day one mobilisation (OR=1.06, CI=1.02-1.10) and return to original residence (OR=1.04, CI=1.00-1.07). Spinal without sedation (p<0.001) and spinal with sedation (p=0.001) were both associated with shorter hospital stays compared with general anaesthesia. No differences in mortality were observed between anaesthetic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal and general anaesthesia achieve similar outcomes for patients with hip fracture. However, this equivalence appears to reflect improved perioperative outcomes (including a reduced risk of delirium, increased likelihood of mobilisation day one post-operatively, shorter length of hospital stay and improved likelihood of returning to previous residence on discharge) among the sub-set of patients who received spinal anaesthesia without sedation. The role and effect of sedation should be studied in future trials of hip fracture patients undergoing spinal anaesthesia.

Multicentre analysis of practice patterns regarding benzodiazepine use in cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

There is controversy regarding optimal use of benzodiazepines during cardiac surgery, and it is unknown whether and to what extent there is variation in practice. We sought to describe benzodiazepine use and sources of variation during cardiac surgeries across patients, clinicians, and institutions.

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of adult cardiac surgeries across a multicentre consortium of USA academic and private hospitals from 2014 to 2019. The primary outcome was administration of a benzodiazepine from 2 h before anaesthesia start until anaesthesia end. Institutional-, clinician-, and patient-level variables were analysed via multilevel mixed-effects models.

RESULTS

Of 65 508 patients cared for by 825 anaesthesiology attending clinicians (consultants) at 33 institutions, 58 004 patients (88.5%) received benzodiazepines with a median midazolam-equivalent dose of 4.0 mg (inter-quartile range [IQR], 2.0-6.0 mg). Variation in benzodiazepine dosage administration was 54.7% attributable to institution, 14.7% to primary attending anaesthesiology clinician, and 30.5% to patient factors. The adjusted median odds ratio for two similar patients receiving a benzodiazepine was 2.68 between two randomly selected clinicians and 4.19 between two randomly selected institutions. Factors strongly associated (adjusted odds ratio, <0.75, or >1.25) with significantly decreased likelihoods of benzodiazepine administration included older age (>80 vs ≤50 yr; adjusted odds ratio=0.04; 95% CI, 0.04-0.05), university affiliation (0.08, 0.02-0.35), recent year of surgery (0.42, 0.37-0.49), and low clinician case volume (0.44, 0.25-0.75). Factors strongly associated with significantly increased likelihoods of benzodiazepine administration included cardiopulmonary bypass (2.26, 1.99-2.55), and drug use history (1.29, 1.02-1.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Two-thirds of the variation in benzodiazepine administration during cardiac surgery are associated with institutions and attending anaesthesiology clinicians (consultants). These data, showing wide variations in administration, suggest that rigorous research is needed to guide evidence-based and patient-centred benzodiazepine administration.

Individualised care or anaesthetist preference: an uncomfortable question

There is widespread variation in how anaesthesia is provided to individual patients even for the same types of surgery. This variation exists within departments, between hospitals, and between countries. Patient and surgical factors are often cited as a justification for variation. Local and national norms, guidance, and standards, and the positive or negative roles of key opinion leaders likely all play a part. Although clinicians may disagree where the line falls between warranted and unwarranted variations, at least some of this variation is down to anaesthetist preference, not individualised patient care.

Hospital-, anaesthetist-, and patient-level variation in peripheral nerve block utilisation for hip fracture surgery: a population-based cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Unwarranted variation in anaesthesia practice is associated with adverse outcomes. Despite high-certainty evidence of benefit, a minority of hip fracture surgery patients receive a peripheral nerve block. Our objective was to estimate variation in peripheral nerve block use at the hospital, anaesthetist, and patient levels, while identifying predictors of peripheral nerve block use in hip fracture patients.

METHODS

After protocol registration (https://osf.io/48bvp/), we conducted a population-based cross-sectional study using linked administrative data in Ontario, Canada. We included adults >65 yr of age having emergency hip fracture surgery from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2018. Logistic mixed models were used to estimate the variation in peripheral nerve block use attributable to hospital-, anaesthetist-, and patient-level factors with use of peripheral nerve block, quantified using the variance partition coefficient and median odds ratio. Predictors of peripheral nerve block use were estimated and temporally validated.

RESULTS

Of 50 950 patients, 9144 (18.5%) received a peripheral nerve block within 1 day of surgery. Patient-level factors accounted for 14% of variation, whereas 42% and 44% were attributable to the hospital and anaesthetist providing care, respectively. The median odds ratio for receiving a peripheral nerve block was 5.73 at the hospital level and 5.97 at the anaesthetist level. No patient factors had large associations with receipt of a peripheral nerve block (odds ratios significant at the 5% level ranged from 0.86 to 1.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient factors explain the minimal variation in peripheral nerve block use for hip fracture surgery. Interventions to increase uptake of peripheral nerve blocks for hip fracture patients will likely need to focus on structures and processes at the hospital and anaesthetist levels.

Hospital safety-net burden is associated with increased inpatient mortality after elective total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective multistate review, 2007-2018

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is among the most common surgical procedures performed in the USA and comprises an outsized proportion of Medicare expenditures. Previous work-associated higher safety-net burden hospitals with increased morbidity and in-hospital mortality following total hip arthroplasty. Here, we examine the association of safety-net burden on postoperative outcomes after TKA.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 1 141 587 patients aged ≥18 years undergoing isolated elective TKA using data from the State Inpatient Databases for Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, New York and Washington from 2007 through 2018. Hospitals were grouped into tertiles by safety-net burden status, defined by the proportion of inpatient cases billed to Medicaid or unpaid (low: 0%-16.83%, medium: 16.84%-30.45%, high: ≥30.45%). Using generalized estimating equation models, we assessed the association of hospital safety-net burden status on in-hospital mortality, patient complications and length of stay (LOS). We also analyzed outcomes by anesthesia type in New York State (NYS), the only state with this data.

RESULTS

Most TKA procedures were performed at medium safety-net burden hospitals (n=6 16 915, 54%), while high-burden hospitals performed the fewest (n=2 04 784, 17.9%). Overall in-patient mortality was low (0.056%), however, patients undergoing TKA at medium-burden hospitals were 40% more likely to die when compared with patients at low-burden hospitals (low: 0.043% vs medium: 0.061%, adjusted OR (aOR): 1.40, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.79, p=0.008). Patients who underwent TKA at medium or high safety-net burden hospitals were more likely to experience intraoperative complications (low: 0.2% vs medium: 0.3%, aOR: 1.94, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.83, p<0.001; low: 0.2% vs high: 0.4%, aOR: 1.91, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.72, p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in other postoperative complications or LOS between the different safety-net levels. In NYS, TKA performed at high safety-net burden hospitals was more likely to use general rather than regional anesthesia (low: 26.7% vs high: 59.5%, aOR: 4.04, 95% CI 1.05 to 15.5, p=0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing TKA at higher safety-net burden hospitals are associated with higher odds of in-patient mortality than those at low safety-net burden hospitals. The source of this mortality differential is unknown but could be related to the increased risk of intraoperative complications at higher burden centers.

Practice Variation in Regional Anesthesia Utilization by Current and Former U.S. Military Anesthesiology Residents

Introduction

Per Joint Trauma System guidelines, military anesthesiologists are expected to be ready to lead an Acute Pain Service with regional anesthesia in combat casualty care. However, regional anesthesia practice volume has not been assessed in the military. The objective of this study was to assess regional anesthesia utilization among current residents and graduates of U.S. military anesthesiology residency programs.

Materials and Methods

All current and former active duty military anesthesiology program residents, trained at any of the four military anesthesiology residency programs between 2013 and 2019, were anonymously surveyed about their regional anesthesia practice. Bivariate statistics described the total single-injection and catheter block techniques utilized in the last month. Cluster analysis assessed for the presence of distinct practice groups within the sample. Follow-up analyses explored potential associations between cluster membership and other variables (e.g., residency training site, residency graduation year, overall confidence in performing regional anesthesia, etc.). This protocol received exemption determination separately from each site’s institutional review board.

Results

Current and former residents reported broad variation in regional anesthesia practice and clustered into four distinct practice groups. Less than half of respondents utilized a moderate to high number of different single-injection and catheter blocks.

Conclusions

These findings highlight the need for creative solutions to increase regional anesthesia training in military anesthesiology programs and continued ability to implement skills, such that all military anesthesiologists have adequate practice for deployed responsibilities.

Association between neuraxial anaesthesia or general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery in adults and clinical outcomes: population based comparative effectiveness study

OBJECTIVE

To examine the associations between neuraxial anaesthesia or general anaesthesia and clinical outcomes, length of hospital stay, and readmission in adults undergoing lower limb revascularisation surgery.

DESIGN

Comparative effectiveness study using linked, validated, population based databases.

SETTING

Ontario, Canada, 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2015.

PARTICIPANTS

20 988 patients Ontario residents aged 18 years or older who underwent their first lower limb revascularisation surgery in hospitals performing 50 or more of these surgeries annually.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was 30 day all cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital cardiopulmonary and renal complications, length of hospital stay, and 30 day readmissions. Multivariable, mixed effects regression models, adjusting for patient, procedural, and hospital characteristics, were used to estimate associations between anaesthetic technique and outcomes. Robustness of analyses were evaluated by conducting instrumental variable, propensity score matched, and survival sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Of 20 988 patients who underwent lower limb revascularisation surgery, 6453 (30.7%) received neuraxial anaesthesia and 14 535 (69.3%) received general anaesthesia. The percentage of neuraxial anaesthesia use ranged from 0.6% to 90.6% across included hospitals. Furthermore, use of neuraxial anaesthesia declined by 17% over the study period. Death within 30 days occurred in 204 (3.2%) patients who received neuraxial anaesthesia and 646 (4.4%) patients who received general anaesthesia. After multivariable, multilevel adjustment, use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with use of general anaesthesia was associated with decreased 30 day mortality (absolute risk reduction 0.72%, 95% confidence interval 0.65% to 0.79%; odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.83; number needed to treat to prevent one death=139). A similar direction and magnitude of association was found in instrumental variable, propensity score matched, and survival analyses. Use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with use of general anaesthesia was also associated with decreased in-hospital cardiopulmonary and renal complications (odds ratio 0.73, 0.63 to 0.85) and a reduced length of hospital stay (-0.5 days, -0.3 to-0.6 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery was associated with decreased 30 day mortality and hospital length of stay. These findings might have been related to reduced cardiopulmonary and renal complications after neuraxial anaesthesia and support the increased use of neuraxial anaesthesia in patients undergoing these surgeries until the results of a large, confirmatory randomised trial become available.

Implications of Practice Variability

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Hospital safety net burden is associated with increased inpatient mortality and postoperative morbidity after total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective multistate review, 2007-2014

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most widely performed surgical procedures in the USA. Safety net hospitals, defined as hospitals with a high proportion of cases billed to Medicaid or without insurance, deliver a significant portion of their care to vulnerable populations, but little is known about the effects of a hospital's safety net burden and its role in healthcare disparities and outcomes following THA. We quantified safety net burden and examined its impact on in-hospital mortality, complications and length of stay (LOS) in patients who underwent THA.

METHODS

We analyzed 500 189 patient discharge records for inpatient primary THA using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases for California, Florida, New York, Maryland and Kentucky from 2007 to 2014. We compared patient demographics, present-on-admission comorbidities and hospital characteristics by hospital safety net burden status. We estimated mixed-effect generalized linear models to assess hospital safety burden status' effect on in-hospital mortality, patient complications and LOS.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing THA at a hospital with a high or medium safety net burden were 38% and 30% more likely, respectively, to die in-hospital compared with those in a low safety net burden hospital (high adjusted OR: 1.38, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.73; medium adjusted OR: 1.30, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.57). Compared with patients treated in hospitals with a low safety net burden, patients treated in high safety net hospitals were more likely to develop a postoperative complication (adjusted OR: 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.24) and require a longer LOS (adjusted IRR: 1.06, 95% CI 1.05, 1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports our hypothesis that patients who underwent THA at hospitals with higher safety net burden have poorer outcomes than patients at hospitals with lower safety net burden.