Insurance Status Biases Trauma-system Utilization and Appropriate Interfacility Transfer: National and Longitudinal Results of Adult, Pediatric, and Older Adult Patients

Taking action to achieve health equity and eliminate healthcare disparities within acute care surgery

Addressing disparities is crucial for enhancing population health, ensuring health security, and fostering resilient health systems. Disparities in acute care surgery (trauma, emergency general surgery, and surgical critical care) have been well documented and the magnitude of inequities demand an intentional, organized, and effective response. As part of its commitment to achieve high-quality, equitable care in all aspects of acute care surgery, the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma convened an expert panel at its eigty-second annual meeting in September 2023 to discuss how to take action to work towards health equity in acute care surgery practice. The panel discussion framed contemporary disparities in the context of historic and political injustices, then identified targets for interventions and potential action items in health system structure, health policy, the surgical workforce, institutional operations and quality efforts. We offer a four-pronged approach to address health inequities: identify, reduce, eliminate, and heal disparities, with the goal of building a healthcare system that achieves equity and justice for all.

Using NEMSIS to report annual air medical transport statistics

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to use the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) dataset to generate national air medical transport statistics.

METHODS

Retrospective review of the 2021 NEMSIS dataset to identify all air medical transfers, both fixed- and rotor-wing. Transfers where then subcategorized into interfacility and scene responses. Frequencies for each category were generated and reported.

RESULTS

A total of 317,267 air medical transfers were completed in 2021. These included 19,421 (6 %) with missing incident location code data. Of the 297,706 transfers with valid location codes, 208,689 (70%) were interfacility transfers, and 89,016 (30%) were scene responses.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary results are consistent with other national estimates and achieve representation of all states and territories. Future work will include longitudinal analysis of NEMSIS datasets and direct survey of transport programs to establish long-term reliability.

The State of the Union: Trauma System Development in the United States

Injury is both a national and international epidemic that affects people of all age, race, religion, and socioeconomic class. Injury was the fourth leading cause of death in the United States (U.S.) in 2021 and results in an incalculable emotional and financial burden on our society. Despite this, when prevention fails, trauma centers allow communities to prepare to care for the traumatically injured patient. Using lessons learned from the military, trauma care has grown more sophisticated in the last 50 years. In 1966, the first civilian trauma center was established, bringing management of injury into the new age. Now, the American College of Surgeons recognizes 4 levels of trauma centers (I-IV), with select states recognizing Level V trauma centers. The introduction of trauma centers in the U.S. has been proven to reduce morbidity and mortality for the injured patient. However, despite the proven benefits of trauma centers, the U.S. lacks a single, unified, trauma system and instead operates within a "system of systems" creating vast disparities in the level of care that can be received, especially in rural and economically disadvantaged areas. In this review we present the history of trauma system development in the U.S, define the different levels of trauma centers, present evidence that trauma systems and trauma centers improve outcomes, outline the current state of trauma system development in the U.S, and briefly mention some of the current challenges and opportunities in trauma system development in the U.S. today.

A Statewide Analysis of Predictors of Trauma Center Transfer: The Burden of Non-Clinical Factors

OBJECTIVES

There is a perception, with mixed literary support, that patients are transferred from community hospitals to tertiary medical centers for non-clinical reasons (ie, payor, race, and admission time). Over-triage risks unequally burdening the tertiary medical centers within a trauma system. This study aims to identify potential non-clinical factors associated with the transfer of injured patients.

METHODS

Using the 2018 North Carolina State Inpatient Database, patients with a primary diagnosis of spine, rib or extremity fractures, or TBI were identified using ICD-10-CM code and admission type of "Urgent," "Emergency," or "Trauma." Patients were divided into cohorts of "retained" (at community hospital) or "transferred" (Level-1 or 2 trauma centers).

RESULTS

11,095 patients met inclusion criteria; 2432 (21.9%) patients made up the transfer cohort. The mean ISS for all retained patients was 2.2 (±.9) and 2.9 (±1.4) for all transferred patients. The transfer cohort was younger (mean age 66 v 75.8), underinsured, and more likely to be admitted after 1700 (P < .001). Similar differences were seen regardless of injury pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients transferred to trauma centers were more likely to be underinsured and be admitted outside of normal business hours. These transferred patients had longer lengths of stay and higher mortality rates. Across all cohorts, similar ISS suggests that a portion of the transfers could be managed at a community hospital. After hours transfers suggest a need for more robust community hospital coverage. Intentional triage of the injured patient encourages appropriate utilization of resources and is crucial to maintaining high-functioning trauma centers and systems.

Interfacility transfer of pediatric trauma patients to higher levels of care: The effect of transfer time and level of receiving trauma center

BACKGROUND

Interfacility transfer of pediatric trauma patients to pediatric trauma centers (PTCs) after evaluation in nontertiary centers is associated with improved outcomes. We aimed to assess the outcomes of transferred pediatric patients based on their severity of the injury, transfer time, and level of receiving PTCs.

METHODS

This is a 3-year (2017-2019) analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database. All children (younger than 15 years) who were transferred from other facilities to Level I or II PTC were included and stratified by level of receiving PTCs and injury severity. Outcome measures were in-hospital mortality and major complications.

RESULTS

A total of 67,726 transferred pediatric trauma patients were identified, of which 52,755 were transferred to Level I and 14,971 to Level II. The mean ± SD age and median Injury Severity Score were 7 ± 4 years and 4 (1-6), respectively. Eighty-five percent were transported by ground ambulance. The median transfer time for Levels I and II was 93 (70-129) and 90 (66-128) minutes, respectively ( p < 0.001). On multivariable regression, interfacility transfers to Level I PTCs were associated with decreased risk-adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality among the mildly to moderately injured group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.59; p = 0.037) and severely injured group with a transfer time of less than 60 minutes (adjusted odds ratio, 0.27; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Every minute increase in the interfacility transfer time is associated with a 2% increase in risk-adjusted odds of mortality among severely injured pediatric trauma patients. Factors other than the level of receiving PTCs, such as estimated transfer time and severity of injury, should be considered while deciding about transferring pediatric trauma patients to higher levels of care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

A Conceptual Framework for Optimizing the Equity of Hospital-Based Emergency Care: The Structure of Hospital Transfer Networks

Policy Points Current pay-for-performance and other payment policies ignore hospital transfers for emergency conditions, which may exacerbate disparities. No conceptual framework currently exists that offers a patient-centered, population-based perspective for the structure of hospital transfer networks. The hospital transfer network equity-quality framework highlights the external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural inequity and racism.

CONTEXT

Emergency care includes two key components: initial stabilization and transfer to a higher level of care. Significant work has focused on ensuring that local facilities can stabilize patients. However, less is understood about transfers for definitive care. To better understand how transfer network structure impacts population health and equity in emergency care, we proposea conceptual framework, the hospital transfer network equity-quality model (NET-EQUITY). NET-EQUITY can help optimize population outcomes, decrease disparities, and enhance planning by supporting a framework for understanding emergency department transfers.

METHODS

To develop the NET-EQUITY framework, we synthesized work on health systems and quality of health care (Donabedian, the Institute of Medicine, Ferlie, and Shortell) and the research framework of the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities with legal and empirical research.

FINDINGS

The central thesis of our framework is that the structure of hospital transfer networks influences patient outcomes, as defined by the Institute of Medicine, which includes equity. The structure of hospital transfer networks is shaped by internal and external factors. The four main external factors are the regulatory, economic environment, provider, and sociocultural and physical/built environment. These environments all implicate issues of equity that are important to understand to foster an equitable population-based system of emergency care. The framework highlights external and internal factors that determine the structure of hospital transfer networks, including structural racism and inequity.

CONCLUSIONS

The NET-EQUITY framework provides a patient-centered, equity-focused framework for understanding the health of populations and how the structure of hospital transfer networks can influence the quality of care that patients receive.

Association of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion With Secondary Overtriage among Young Adult Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

Previous work has shown that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion decreased the uninsured rate and improved some trauma outcomes among young adult trauma patients, but no studies have investigated the impact of ACA Medicaid expansion on secondary overtriage, namely the unnecessary transfer of non-severely injured patients to tertiary trauma centers.

METHODS

Statewide hospital inpatient and emergency department discharge data from two Medicaid expansion and one non-expansion state were used to compare changes in insurance coverage and secondary overtriage among trauma patients aged 19-44 y transferred into a level I or II trauma center before (2011-2013) to after (2014-quarter 3, 2015) Medicaid expansion. Difference-in-difference (DD) analyses were used to compare changes overall, by race/ethnicity, and by ZIP code-level median income quartiles.

RESULTS

Medicaid expansion was associated with a decrease in the proportion of patients uninsured (DD: -4.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval (CI): -7.4 to -1.2), an increase in the proportion of patients insured by Medicaid (DD: 8.2; 95% CI: 5.0 to 11.3), but no difference in the proportion of patients who experienced secondary overtriage (DD: -1.5; 95% CI: -4.8 to 1.8). There were no differences by race/ethnicity or community income level in the association of Medicaid expansion with secondary overtriage.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first 2 y after ACA Medicaid expansion, insurance coverage increased but secondary overtriage rates were unchanged among young adult trauma patients transferred to level I or II trauma centers.

Systemic Determinants in Surgery: Nonclinical Factors Affecting Time to Operation for Incarcerated Ventral Hernias

INTRODUCTION

We explore nonclinical factors affecting the amount of time from admission to the operating room for patients requiring nonelective repair of ventral hernias.

METHODS

Using the 2005-2012 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we identified adult patients with a primary diagnosis of ventral hernia without obstruction/gangrene, who underwent nonelective repair. The outcome variable of interest was time from admission to surgery. We performed univariate and multivariable analyses using negative binomial regression, adjusting for age, sex, race, income, insurance, admission day, comorbidity status (van Walraven score), diagnosis, procedure, hospital size, location/teaching status, and region.

RESULTS

7,253 patients met criteria, of which majority were women (n = 4,615) and white (n = 5,394). The majority of patients had private insurance (n = 3,015) followed by Medicare (n = 2,737). Median time to operation was 0 days. Univariate analysis comparing operation <1 day to ≥1 day identified significant differences in race, day of admission, insurance, length of stay, comorbidity status, hospital location, type, and size. Negative binomial regression showed that weekday admission (IRR 4.42, P < .0001), private insurance (IRR 1.53-2.66, P < .0001), rural location (IRR 1.39-1.76, P < .01), small hospital size (IRR 1.26-1.36, P < .05), white race (IRR 1.30-1.34, P < .01), healthier patients (van Walraven score IRR 1.05, P < .0001), and use of mesh (IRR 0.39-0.56, P < .02) were associated with shorter time until procedure.

CONCLUSION

Shorter time from admission to the operating room was associated with several nonclinical factors, which suggest disparities may exist. Further prospective studies are warranted to elucidate these disparities affecting patient care.

The extent to which geography explains one of trauma's troubling trends: Insurance-based differences in appropriate interfacility transfer

BACKGROUND

A growing body of literature suggests the persistence of a counterproductive triage pattern wherein uninsured adults with major injuries presenting to nontrauma centers (NTCs) are more likely than insured adults to be transferred. Geographic differences are frequently blamed. The objective of this study was to explore geography's influence on variations in insurance transfer patterns, asking whether differences in distance and travel time by road from NTCs to the nearest level 1 or 2 trauma center alter the effect. As a secondary objective, differences in neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage were also assessed.

METHODS

Adults (16-64 years) with major injuries (Injury Severity Score, >15) presenting to NTC emergency departments (EDs) were abstracted from 2007 to 2014 state inpatient/ED claims. Differences in the risk-adjusted odds of admission versus transfer were compared using mixed-effect hierarchical logistic regression and spatial analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 48,283 adults presenting to 492 NTC EDs were included. Among them, risk-adjusted admission differences based on insurance status exist (e.g., private vs. uninsured odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 1.60 [1.45-1.76]). Spatial analysis revealed significant geographic variation ( p < 0.001). However, in contrast to expectations, the largest insurance-based discrepancies were seen in less disadvantaged NTCs located closer to larger trauma centers. Stratified analyses comparing the closest versus furthest distance, shortest versus longest travel time, and least versus most deprived populations agreed, as did sensitivity analyses restricting uninsured transfer patients to those who remained uninsured versus subsequently became insured.

CONCLUSION

Adults with major injuries presenting to NTCs were less likely to be transferred if insured. The trend persisted after accounting for differences in access to care, revealing that, while significant geographic variation in the phenomenon exists, geography alone does not explain the issue. Taken together, the findings suggest that additional and potentially subjective elements to insurance-based triage disparities at NTCs are likely to exist.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic/Epidemiological, Level III.

Burn related injuries: a nationwide analysis of adult inter-facility transfers over a six-year period in the United States

Background

US emergency department (ED) visits for burns and factors associated with inter-facility transfer are unknown and described in this manuscript.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of burn-related injuries from 2009–2014 using the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), the largest sample of all-payer datasets. We included all ED visits by adults with a burn related ICD-9 code and used a weighted multivariable logistic regression model to predict transfer adjusting for covariates.

Results

Between 2009–2014, 3,047,701 (0.4%) ED visits were for burn related injuries. A total of 108,583 (3.6%) burn visits resulted in inter-facility transfers occurred during the study period, representing approximately 18,097 inter-facility transfers per year. Burns with greater than 10% total body surface area (TBSA) resulted in a 10-fold increase in the probability of transfer, compared to burn visits with less than 10% TBSA burns. In the multivariable model, male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.4, 95% CI 2.3–2.6) was associated with increased odds of transfer. Older adults were more likely to be transferred compared to all other age groups. Odds of transfer were increased for Medicare and self-pay patients (vs. private pay) but there was a significant interaction of sex and payer and the effect of insurance varied by sex.

Conclusions

In a national sample of ED visits, burn visits were more than twice as likely to have an inter-facility transfer compared to the general ED patient population. Substantial sex differences exist in U.S. EDs that impact the location of care for patients with burn injuries and warrants further investigation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-022-00705-6.

Defining Referral Regions for Inpatient Trauma Care: The Utility of a Novel Geographic Definition

INTRODUCTION

Geographic variation is an inherent feature of the US health system. Despite efforts to account for geographic variation in trauma system strengthening, it remains unclear how trauma "regions" should be defined. The objective of this study is to evaluate the utility of a novel definition of Trauma Referral Regions (TRR) for assessing geographic variation in inpatient trauma across the age span of hospitalized trauma patients.

METHODS

Using 2016-2017 State Inpatient Databases, we assessed the extent of geographic variability in three common metrics of hospital use (localization index, market share index, net patient flow) among TRRs and, as a comparison, trauma regions alternatively defined based on Hospital Referral Regions, Hospital Service Areas, and counties.

RESULTS

A total of 860,593 admissions from 102 TRRs, 127 Hospital Referral Regions, 884 Hospital Service Areas, and 583 counties were included. Consistent with expectations for distinct trauma regions, TRR presented with high average localization indices (mean [standard deviation]: 83.4 [11.7%]), low market share indices (mean [standard deviation]: 11.9 [7.0%]), and net patient flows close to 1.00. Similar results were found among stratified pediatric, adult, and older adult patients. Associations between TRRs and variations in important demographic features (e.g., travel time by road to the nearest Level I or II Trauma Center) suggest that while indicative of standalone trauma regions, TRRs are also able to simultaneously capture critical variations in regional trauma care.

CONCLUSIONS

TRRs offer a standalone set of geographic regions with minimal variation in common metrics of hospital use, minimal geographic clustering, and preserved associations with important demographic factors. They provide a needed, valid means of assessing geographic variation among trauma systems.

Hospital-Acquired Condition Rate of Admitting Facility Does Not Predict Mortality in Traumatically Injured Patients

Background: Hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) are increasingly scrutinized as markers of hospital quality and are subject to increasing regulatory and financial pressure. Despite this, there is little evidence that HACs are associated with poor outcomes in traumatically injured patients, or that lower HAC rates are a marker of a better quality of care. Our study compares mortality rates in hospitals with high versus low rates of HAC. Our hypothesis is that high HAC trauma centers have higher mortality.

Methods: The latest editions of the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) containing facility identification keys (2011 to 2015) were combined. The HACs targeted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) were identified. Hospital-acquired conditions per 1000 patient-days were calculated for individual trauma centers, and these facilities were stratified into quartiles by HAC rate. Propensity score matching was used to match patients admitted to hospitals in the highest versus the lowest quartiles.

Results: Complete data was available for 3,510,818 patients; 58,296 (1.67%) developed HACs recorded in the NTDB. Good performing centers had a mean of 0.84 HACs per 1000 patient-days compared to 7.82 at poor-performing centers. After propensity matching, patients treated at good performing centers had higher mortality of 1.22% versus 1.02% at poor-performing centers (p<0.001). The facility characteristics most over-represented in the poor performing quartile were: University (45.19% vs 10.59%, p<0.001), American College of Surgeons (ACS) Level I Status (31.85% vs 2.24%, p<0.001), and bed size > 600 (28.15% vs 5.5%, p<0.001).

Conclusion: Injured patients treated at poor-performing centers (high HAC) have reduced mortality relative to good performing centers (low HAC). Large academic centers were overwhelmingly represented in the poor-performing quartile. Hospital-acquired conditions may be markers of a non-modifiable underlying patient and facility characteristics rather than markers of poor hospital quality.

The impact of the Affordable Care Act's medicaid expansion on patients admitted for burns: An analysis of national data

INTRODUCTION

The first states began implementing the Medicaid expansion provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2014. Studies have yet to address its impact on burn patients.

METHODS

Burn patients in geographic regions that expanded Medicaid coverage were compared to patients in regions that did not expand Medicaid before and after implementation of the ACA using bivariate statistics and a difference-in-differences model. A multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with having Medicaid insurance. The primary outcome of this study was the rate of Medicaid insurance.

RESULTS

Of 25,331 discharges, we found greater increases in Medicaid coverage after the ACA in the Medicaid expander regions (23.4-40.2%) compared to the non-expander regions (18.5-20.1%). The difference-in-differences estimate between the expander and non-expander regions was 0.15 (95% CI: 0.11-0.18, p < 0.001). Patients admitted in expander regions were more likely to be insured by Medicaid (OR 1.57 [95%CI 1.21-2.05]), as were patients of Black race (OR 1.25 [95%CI 1.19-1.32), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.29 [95%CI 1.14-1.46]), and female sex (OR 1.59 [95%CI 1.11-2.27]). We also found a significant interaction between time period (pre-ACA/post-ACA) and expander region location (OR 2.10 [95%CI 1.67-2.62]).

CONCLUSIONS

The Medicaid expansion provision of the ACA led to increased Medicaid coverage among burn patients which was significantly higher in areas with widespread implementation of the expansion.

Insurance-based inequities in emergency interhospital transfers: an argument for the prioritisation of patient care

Currently there is an inequity in transfer rates of uninsured patients versus their insured counterparts. While this may vary by hospital system, studies indicate that this is a national trend, especially in emergency situations, and represents a prioritisation of profits over ethical obligations. This creates a variety of ethical issues for patients and society that generates a concordance between deontological and utilitarian viewpoints, two generally opposed schools of thought. The prioritisation of profit maximisation in order to provide better care for a select population is insufficient to justify deleterious health outcomes, stress and financial burden on patients. Current policy regarding patient transfers in the emergency department is insufficient to protect the uninsured and must be reevaluated.

Impact of Affordable Care Act Insurance Expansion on Pre-Hospital Access to Care: Changes in Adult Perforated Appendix Admission Rates after Medicaid Expansion and the Dependent Coverage Provision

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) changed the landscape of insurance coverage, allowing young adults to remain on their parents' insurance until age 26 (Dependent Coverage Provision [DCP]) and states to optionally expand Medicaid up to 133% of the federal poverty level. Although both improved insurance coverage, little is known about the ACA's impact on observed receipt of timely access to acute care. The objective of this study was to compare changes in insurance coverage and perforation rates among hospitalized adults with acute appendicitis "after vs before" Medicaid expansion and the DCP using an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)-certified metric designed to measure pre-hospital access to care.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a quasi-experimental, difference-in-difference (DID) analysis of 2008-2015 state-level inpatient claims.

RESULTS

Adults, aged 19 to 64, in expansion states experienced an absolute 7.7 percentage point decline in uninsured (95% CI 7.5 to 7.9) after Medicaid expansion compared with nonexpansion states. This coincided with a 5.4 percentage point drop in admissions for perforated appendicitis (95% CI 5.0 to 5.8) that was most pronounced among young adults, aged 26 to 34, just age-ineligible for the DCP (DID: 11.5 percentage points). Medicaid expansion insurance changes were 4.1 times larger than those encountered under the DCP (DID: 1.9). They affected all population subgroups and significantly reduced access-related disparities in race/ethnicity and lower-income communities. Although both Medicaid expansion and the DCP were associated with significant insurance gains, those attributable to the DCP were more concentrated among more privileged patients. Despite this trend, both policies resulted in larger reductions in perforation rates for historically uninsured and underserved groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in uninsured after Medicaid expansion and the DCP were associated with significant reductions in perforated appendix admission rates. Improvements in access to acute surgical care suggest that maintained/continued insurance expansion could lead to fewer delays, better patient outcomes, and reductions in disparities among the most at-risk populations.