Trends in the Geospatial Distribution of Inpatient Adult Surgical Services across the United States

Poverty and Its Impact on Surgical Care

In this article, the authors explore the intricate relationship between poverty and surgical care, underscoring its multifaceted nature and its profound impact on access and outcomes. Poverty extends beyond financial constraints to encompass barriers related to healthcare infrastructure, geographic isolation, education, mental health, and social determinants of health, resulting in persistent disparities in access to high-quality surgical care, especially for those in persistently impoverished areas and access-sensitive surgical conditions. Additionally, the authors delve into the complex intersection of poverty, race, and ethnicity, emphasizing the heightened risks faced by minority patients in surgical care.

Association Between Historical Redlining and Access to High-Volume Hospitals Among Patients Undergoing Complex Cancer Surgery in California

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine the impact of historical redlining on travel patterns and utilization of high-volume hospitals (HVHs) among patients undergoing complex cancer operations.

METHODS

The California Department of Health Care Access and Information database was utilized to identify patients who underwent esophagectomy (ES), pneumonectomy (PN), pancreatectomy (PA), or proctectomy (PR) for cancer between 2010 and 2020. Patient ZIP codes were assigned Home Owners' Loan Corporation grades (A: 'Best'; B: 'Still Desirable'; C: 'Definitely Declining'; and D: 'Hazardous/Redlined'). A clustered multivariable regression was used to assess the likelihood of patients undergoing surgery at an HVH, bypassing the nearest HVH, and total real driving time and travel distance.

RESULTS

Among 14,944 patients undergoing high-risk cancer surgery (ES: 4.7%, n = 1216; PN: 57.8%, n = 8643; PD: 14.4%, n = 2154; PR: 23.1%, n = 3452), 782 (5.2%) individuals resided in the 'Best', whereas 3393 (22.7%) individuals resided in redlined areas. Median travel distance was 7.8 miles (interquartile range [IQR] 4.1-14.4) and travel time was 16.1 min (IQR 10.7-25.8). Overall, 10,763 (ES: 17.4%; PN: 76.0%; PA: 63.5%; PR: 78.4%) patients underwent surgery at an HVH. On multivariable regression, patients residing in redlined areas were less likely to undergo surgery at an HVH (odds ratio [OR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.82) and were more likely to bypass the nearest hospital (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.44-2.46). Notably, Medicaid insurance, minority status, limited English-language proficiency, and educational level mediated the disparities in access to HVH.

CONCLUSION

Surgical disparities in access to HVH among patients from historically redlined areas are largely mediated by social determinants such as insurance and minority status.

Association of social determinants of health International Classification of Disease, Tenth Edition clinical modification codes with outcomes for emergency general surgery and trauma admissions

BACKGROUND

Patients with Acute Care Surgery needs (ie, emergency general surgery diagnosis or trauma admission) are at particularly high risk for nonmedical patient-related factors that can be important drivers of healthcare outcomes. These social determinants of health are typically ascertained at the geographic area level (ie, county or neighborhood) rather than at the individual patient level. Recently, the International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition created codes to capture health hazards related to patient socioeconomic and psychosocial circumstances. We sought to characterize the impact of these social determinants of health-related codes on perioperative outcomes among patients with acute care surgery needs.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed between 2017 and 2020 with acute care surgery needs (ie, emergency general surgery diagnosis or a trauma admission) were identified in the California Department of Healthcare Access and information Patient Discharge database. Data on concomitant social determinants of health-related codes (International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition Z55-Z65), which designated health hazards related to socioeconomic and psychosocial (socioeconomic and psychosocial, respectively) circumstances, were obtained. After controlling for patient factors, including age, sex, race, payer type, and admitting hospital, the association of socioeconomic and psychosocial codes with perioperative outcomes and hospital disposition was analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 483,280 with an acute care surgery admission (emergency general surgery: n = 289,530, 59.9%; trauma: n = 193,705, 40.1%) mean age was 56.5 years (standard deviation: 21.5) and 271,911 (56.3%) individuals were male. Overall, 16,263 (3.4%) patients had a concomitant socioeconomic and psychosocial diagnosis code. The percentage of patients with a concurrent social determinants of health International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition diagnosis increased throughout the study period from 2.6% in 2017 to 4.4% in 2020. Patients that were male (odds ratio 1.89; 95% confidence interval 1.82, 1.96), insured by Medicaid (odds ratio 5.43; 95% confidence interval 5.15, 5.72) or self-pay (odds ratio 3.04; 95% confidence interval 2.75, 3.36) all had higher odds of having an social determinants of health International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition diagnosis. Black race did not have a significant association with an social determinants of health International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition diagnosis (odds ratio 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.94, 1.04); however, Hispanic (odds ratio 0.44; 95% confidence interval 0.43, 0.46) and Asian (odds ratio 0.40; 95% confidence interval 0.36, 0.44) race/ethnicity was associated with a lower odds of having an social determinants of health International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition diagnosis. After controlling for competing risk factors on multivariable analyses, the risk-adjusted probability of hospital postoperative death was 3.1% (95% confidence interval 2.8, 3.4) among patients with a social determinants of health diagnosis versus 5.9% (95% confidence interval 5.9, 6.0) (odds ratio 0.48; 95% confidence interval 0.44, 0.54) among patients without a social determinants of health diagnosis. Risk-adjusted complications were 26.7% (95% confidence interval 26.1, 37.3) among patients with a social determinants of health diagnosis compared with 31.9% (95% confidence interval 31.7, 32.0) (odds ratio 0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.71, 0.77) among patients without a social determinants of health diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition social determinants of health code use was low, with only 3.4% of patients having documentation of a socioeconomic and psychosocial circumstance. The presence of an International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Tenth Edition social determinants of health code was not associated with greater odds of complications or death; however, it was associated with longer length of stay and higher odds of being discharged to a skilled nursing facility.

Inter-Hospital Transfer Is an Independent Risk Factor for Hospital-Associated Infection

Background: Regionalization of surgical care shifts higher acuity patients to larger centers. Hospital-associated infections (HAIs) are important quality measures with financial implications. In our ongoing efforts to eliminate HAIs, we examined the potential role for inter-hospital transfer in our cases of HAI across a multihospital system. Hypothesis: Surgical patients transferred to a regional multihospital system have a higher risk of National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN)-labeled HAIs. Patients and Methods: The analysis cohort of adult surgical inpatients was filtered from a five-hospital health system administration registry containing encounters from 2014 to 2021. The dataset contained demographics, health characteristics, and acuity variables, along with the NHSN defined HAIs of central line-associated blood stream infection (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). Univariable and multivariable statistics were performed. Results: The surgical cohort identified 92,832 patients of whom 3,232 (3.5%) were transfers. The overall HAI rate was 0.6% (528): 86 (0.09%) CLABSI, 133 (0.14%) CAUTI, and 325 (0.35%) CDI. Across the three HAIs, the rate was higher in transfer patients compared with non-transfer patients (CLABSI: n = 18 (1.3%); odds ratio [OR], 4.79; CAUTI: n = 25 (1.8%); OR, 4.20; CDI: n = 37 (1.1%); OR, 3.59); p < 0.001 for all. Multivariable analysis found transfer patients had an increased rate of HAIs (OR, 1.56; p < 0.001). Conclusions: There is an increased risk-adjusted rate of HAIs in transferred surgical patients as reflected in the NHSN metrics. This phenomenon places a burden on regional centers that accept high-risk surgical transfers, in part because of the downstream effects of healthcare reimbursement programs.

Evaluating potential disparities in geospatial access to American College of Surgeons/American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-verified emergency general surgery centers

BACKGROUND

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma and the American College of Surgeons have recently introduced emergency general surgery (EGS) center verification, which could enhance patient outcomes. Distance and resource availability may affect access to these centers, which has been linked to higher mortality. Although many patients can receive adequate care at community centers, those with critical conditions may require specialized treatment at EGS-verified centers. We aimed to evaluate geospatial access to potential EGS-verified centers and identify disparities across different scenarios of EGS verification program uptake in the United States.

METHODS

We used hospital capabilities and verified pilot centers to estimate potential patterns of which centers would become EGS verified under four scenarios (EGS centers, high-volume EGS centers, high-volume EGS plus level 1 trauma centers, and quaternary referral centers). We calculated the spatial accessibility index using an enhanced two-step floating catchment technique to determine geospatial access for each scenario. We also evaluated social determinants of health across geospatial access using the Area Deprivation Index (ADI).

RESULTS

A total of 1,932 hospitals were categorized as EGS centers, 307 as high-volume EGS centers, 401 as high-volume EGS plus level 1trauma centers, and 146 as quaternary centers. Spatial accessibility index decreased as the stringency of EGS verification increased in each scenario (226.6 [111.7-330.7], 51.8 [0-126.1], 71.52 [3.34-164.56], 6.2 [0-62.2]; p < 0.001). Within each scenario, spatial accessibility index also declined as the ADI quartile increased ( p < 0.001). The high-volume EGS plus level 1trauma center scenario had the most significant disparity in access between the first and fourth ADI quartiles (-54.68).

CONCLUSION

Access to EGS-verified centers may vary considerably based on the program's implementation. Disadvantaged communities may be disproportionately affected by limited access. Further work to study regional needs can allow a strategic implementation of the EGS verification program to optimize outcomes while minimizing disparities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Association of ICD-10 Clinical Modification Codes for Social Determinants of Health with Surgical Outcomes and Hospital Charges Among Cancer Patients

INTRODUCTION

We sought to characterize the impact of social determinants of health (SDOH)-related codes on outcomes among patients with a cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with lung, pancreas, colon, or rectal cancer between 2017 and 2020 were identified in the California Department of Healthcare Access and Information Patient Discharge Database. Data on concomitant SDOH-related codes (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] Z55-Z65) designating health hazards related to socioeconomic and psychosocial circumstances were obtained. The association of these SDOH codes with postoperative outcomes was evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 10,421 patients who underwent an operation from 2017 to 2020, median age was 66 years (interquartile range [IQR] 56-75) and nearly half of the cohort was male (n = 551,252.9%). In total, 102 (1%) patients had a concurrent ICD-10 SDOH diagnosis. After controlling for competing risk factors, the risk-adjusted probability of in-hospital death was 4.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-7.2) among patients with an SDOH diagnosis compared with 2.9% (95% CI 2.5-3.2) among patients without an SDOH diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.52, 95% CI 0.63-3.66; p = 0.258); postoperative complications were 27.0% (95% CI 20.0-34.1) compared with 24.9% (95% CI 24.1-25.6) among patients without an SDOH diagnosis (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.73-1.82; p = 0.141), and length of stay was 10.6 days (95% CI 10.0-11.2) compared with 9.4 days (95% CI 9.3-9.5) among patients without an SDOH diagnosis. Patients with an SDOH diagnosis had a 5.19 (95% CI 3.23-8.34; p < 0.005) higher odds of being discharged to a skilled nursing facility versus patients without an SDOH diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Uptake and utilization of ICD-10 SDOH was 1% among California patients with lung, pancreas, colon, or rectal cancer. Patients with a concomitant ICD-10 SDOH code had longer length of stay and had higher odds of being discharged to a skilled nursing facility.

Poor Access to Mental Healthcare is Associated with Worse Postoperative Outcomes Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Mental health has an important role in the care of cancer patients, and access to mental health services may be associated with improved outcomes. Thus, poor access to psychiatric services may contribute to suboptimal cancer treatment. We conducted a geospatial analysis to characterize psychiatrist distribution and assess the impact of mental healthcare shortages with surgical outcomes among patients with gastrointestinal cancer.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries with mental illness diagnosed with complex gastrointestinal cancers between 2004 and 2016 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare registry. National Provider Identifier-registered psychiatrist locations were mapped and linked to SEER-Medicare records. Regional access to psychiatric services was assessed relative to textbook outcome, a composite assessment of postoperative complications, prolonged length of stay, 90-day readmission and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 15,714 patients with mental illness and gastrointestinal cancer, 3937 were classified as having high access to psychiatric services while 3910 had low access. On multivariable logistic regression, areas with low access had higher risk of worse postoperative outcomes. Specifically, individuals residing in areas with low access had increased odds of prolonged length of stay (OR 1.11, 95%CI 1.01-1.22; p = 0.028) and 90-day readmission (OR 1.19, 95%CI 1.08-1.31; p < 0.001), as well as decreased odds of textbook outcome (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.77-0.93; p < 0.001) and discharge to home (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.80-0.99; p = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Patients with mental illness and lower access to psychiatric services had worse postoperative outcomes. Policymakers and providers should prioritize incorporating mental health screening and access to psychiatric services to address disparities among patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.

Optimizing care delivery in expanding health systems: Views from clinical leaders

INTRODUCTION

In response to intense market pressures, many hospitals have consolidated into systems. However, evidence suggests that consolidation has not led to the improvements in clinical quality promised by proponents of mergers. The challenges to delivering care within expanding health systems and the opportunities posed to surgical leaders remains largely unexplored.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews with 30 surgical leaders at teaching hospitals affiliated with health systems from August-December 2019. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded in an iterative process using MaxQDA software. Attitudes and strategies toward redesigning health care delivery across expanding systems were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Leaders reported challenges to redesigning care delivery across the system ranging from resource constraints (e.g. hospital beds and operating rooms) to evolving market demands (e.g., patient preferences to receive care close to home). However, participants also highlighted that system expansion provided multiple opportunities to increase access (e.g. decant low-complexity care to affiliated centers) and improve quality of care (e.g. standardize best practices) for diverse populations including the potential to leverage their health system to expand access and improve quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Though evidence suggests that hospital consolidation has not led to redesigned care delivery or improved clinical quality at a national level, leaders are pursuing varying sets of strategies aimed at leveraging system expansion in order to improve access and quality of care.

Variations in Travel Patterns Affect Regionalization of Complex Cancer Surgery in California

INTRODUCTION

Regionalization of complex surgical procedures may improve healthcare quality. We sought to define the impact of regionalization on access to high-volume hospitals for complex oncologic procedures in the state of California.

METHODS

The California Department of Health Care Access and Information Database (2012-2016) identified patients who underwent esophagectomy (ES), pneumonectomy (PN), pancreatectomy (PA), or proctectomy (PR). Geospatial analysis was conducted to determine travel patterns. Clustered multivariable regression was performed to assess the probability of receiving care at a high-volume center.

RESULTS

Among 25,070 patients (ES: n = 1216, 4.9%; PN: n = 13,247, 52.8%; PD: n = 3559, 14.2%; PR: n = 7048, 28.1%), 6575 (26.2%) individuals resided within 30 min, 11,046 (44.1%) resided within 30-60 min, 7125 (28.4%) resided within 60-90 min, and 324 (1.3%) resided beyond a 90-min travel window from a high-volume center. Median travel distance was 13.4 miles (interquartile range [IQR] 6.0-28.7). On multivariable regression, patients residing further away were more likely to bypass a low-volume center to undergo care at a high-volume hospital (odds ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.12-1.55) versus individuals residing closer to high-volume centers. Approximately one-third (29.7%) of patients lived beyond a 1-h travel window to the nearest high-volume hospital, of whom 5% traveled over 90 min. While hospital mortality rates across different travel time windows did not differ, surgery at a high-volume center was associated with an overall 1.2% decrease in in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Regionalization of complex cancer surgery may be associated with a significant travel burden for a large subset of patients with complex cancer.

Impact of Community Privilege on Access to Care Among Patients Following Complex Cancer Surgery

OBJECTIVE

We sought to define the impact of community privilege on variations in travel patterns and access to care at high-volume hospitals for complex surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND

With increased emphasis on centralization of high-risk surgery, social determinants of health play a critical role in preventing equitable access to care. Privilege is a right, benefit, advantage, or opportunity that positively impacts all social determinants of health.

METHODS

The California Office of State-wide Health Planning Database identified patients who underwent esophagectomy (ES), pneumonectomy (PN), pancreatectomy (PA), or proctectomy (PR) for a malignant diagnosis between 2012 and 2016 and was merged using ZIP codes with the Index of Concentration of Extremes, a validated metric of both spatial polarization and privilege obtained from the American Community Survey. Clustered multivariable regression was performed to assess the probability of undergoing care at a high-volume center, bypassing the nearest and high-volume center, and total real driving time and travel distance.

RESULTS

Among 25,070 patients who underwent a complex oncologic operation (ES: n=1216, 4.9%; PN: n=13,247, 52.8%; PD: n=3559, 14.2%; PR: n=7048, 28.1%), 5019 (20.0%) individuals resided in areas with the highest privilege (i.e., White, high-income homogeneity), whereas 4994 (19.9%) individuals resided in areas of the lowest privilege (i.e., Black, low-income homogeneity). Median travel distance was 33.1 miles (interquartile range 14.4-72.2). Roughly, three-quarters of patients (overall: 74.8%, ES: 35.0%; PN: 74.3%; PD: 75.2%; PR: 82.2%) sought surgical care at a high-volume center. On multivariable regression, patients residing in the least advantaged communities were less likely to undergo surgery at a high-volume hospital (overall: odds ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.52-0.81). Of note, individuals in the least privileged areas had longer travel distances (28.5 miles, 95% CI 21.2-35.8) to reach the destination facility, as well as over 70% greater odds of bypassing a high-volume hospital to undergo surgical care at a low-volume center (odds ratio 1.74, 95% CI 1.29-2.34) versus individuals living in the highest privileged areas.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Privilege had a marked effect on access to complex oncologic surgical care at high-volume centers. These data highlight the need to focus on privilege as a key social determinant of health that influences patient access to and utilization of health care resources.

The Impact of Telemedicine in Reducing the Carbon Footprint in Health Care: A Systematic Review and Cumulative Analysis of 68 Million Clinical Consultations

CONTEXT

Carbon footprint (CF) has emerged as an important factor when assessing health care interventions.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the reduction in CF for patients utilizing telemedicine.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were queried for studies describing telemedicine consultation and reporting on carbon emissions saved and the carbon emissions of telemedicine devices as primary outcomes, and travel distance and time and cost savings and safety as secondary outcomes. Outcomes were tabulated and calculated per consultation. Carbon emissions and travel distances were also calculated for each total study cohort. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and the Oxford level of evidence was determined.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 48 studies met the inclusion criteria, covering 68 465 481 telemedicine consultations and savings of 691 825 tons of CO2 emissions and 3 318 464 047 km of travel distance. Carbon assessment was mostly reported as the estimated distance saved using a conversion factor. Medical specialties used telemedicine to connect specialists with patients at home (n = 25) or at a local center (n = 6). Surgical specialties used telemedicine for virtual preoperative assessment (n = 9), follow-up (n = 4), and general consultation (n = 4). The savings per consultation were 21.9-632.17 min and $1.85-$325. More studies focused on the COVID-19 time frame (n = 33) than before the pandemic (n = 15). The studies are limited by calculations, mostly for the travel distance for carbon savings, and appropriate follow-up to analyze the real impact on travel and appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

Telemedicine reduces the CF of the health care sector. Expanding the use of telemedicine and educating providers and patients could further decrease CO2 emissions and save both money and time.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed 48 studies on the use of telemedicine. We found that people used their cars less and saved time and money, as well as CO2 emissions, if they used teleconsultations. Some studies only looked at how much CO2 from driving was saved, so there might be more to learn about the benefits of teleconsultations. The use of online doctor appointments is not only good for our planet but also helps patients in saving time and money. This review is registered on the PROSPERO database for systematic reviews (CRD42023456839).

Rural-Urban Disparities in Hospital Admissions and Mortality Among Patients with COVID-19: Evidence from South Carolina from 2021 to 2022

Although rural communities have been hard-hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, there is limited evidence on COVID-19 outcomes in rural America using up-to-date data. This study aimed to estimate the associations between hospital admissions and mortality and rurality among COVID-19 positive patients who sought hospital care in South Carolina. We used all-payer hospital claims, COVID-19 testing, and vaccination history data from January 2021 to January 2022 in South Carolina. We included 75,545 hospital encounters within 14 days after positive and confirmatory COVID-19 testing. Associations between hospital admissions and mortality and rurality were estimated using multivariable logistic regressions. About 42% of all encounters resulted in an inpatient hospital admission, while hospital-level mortality was 6.3%. Rural residents accounted for 31.0% of all encounters for COVID-19. After controlling for patient-level, hospital, and regional characteristics, rural residents had higher odds of overall hospital mortality (Adjusted Odds Ratio - AOR = 1.19, 95% Confidence Intervals - CI = 1.04-1.37), both as inpatients (AOR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.05-1.34) and as outpatients (AOR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.03-2.59). Sensitivity analyses using encounters with COVID-like illness as the primary diagnosis only and encounters from September 2021 and beyond - a period when the Delta variant was dominant and booster vaccination was available - yielded similar estimates. No significant differences were observed in inpatient hospitalizations (AOR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.75-1.33) between rural and urban residents. Policymakers should consider community-based public health approaches to mitigate geographic disparities in health outcomes among disadvantaged population subgroups.

Rural Disparities in Lung Cancer-directed Surgery: A Medicare Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to determine the influence of rural residence on access to and outcomes of lung cancer-directed surgery for Medicare beneficiaries.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancerrelated death in the United States and rural patients have 20% higher mortality. Drivers of rural disparities along the continuum of lung cancercare delivery are poorly understood.

METHODS

Medicare claims (2015-2018) were used to identify 126,352 older adults with an incident diagnosis of nonmetastatic lung cancer. Rural Urban Commuting Area codes were used to define metropolitan, micropolitan, small town, and rural site of residence. Multivariable logistic regression models evaluated influence of place of residence on 1) receipt of cancer-directed surgery, 2) time from diagnosis to surgery, and 3) postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Metropolitan beneficiaries had higher rate of cancer-directed surgery (22.1%) than micropolitan (18.7%), small town (17.5%), and isolated rural (17.8%) (P < 0.001). Compared to patients from metropolitan areas, there were longer times from diagnosis to surgery for patients living in micropolitan, small, and rural communities. Multivariable models found nonmetropolitan residence to be associated with lower odds of receiving cancer-directed surgery and MIS. Nonmetropolitan residence was associated with higher odds of having postoperative emergency department visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Residence in nonmetropolitan areas is associated with lower probability of cancer-directed surgery, increased time to surgery, decreased use of MIS, and increased postoperative ED visits. Attention to timely access to surgery and coordination of postoperative care for nonmetropolitan patients could improve care delivery.

Racial and ethnic disparities in interhospital transfer for complex emergency general surgical disease across the United States

BACKGROUND

Differential access to specialty surgical care can drive health care disparities, and interhospital transfer (IHT) is one mechanism through which access barriers can be realized for vulnerable populations. The association between race/ethnicity and IHT for patients presenting with complex emergency general surgery (EGS) disease is understudied.

METHODS

Using the 2019 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, we identified patients 18 years and older with 1 of 13 complex EGS diseases based on International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision , diagnosis codes. The primary outcome was IHT. A series of weighted logistic regression models was created to determine the association of race/ethnicity with the primary outcome while controlling for patient and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 387,610 weighted patient encounters from 989 hospitals, 59,395 patients (15.3%) underwent IHT. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, rates of IHT were significantly lower for non-Hispanic Black (15% vs. 17%; unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) [95% confidence interval (CI)], 0.58 [0.49-0.68]; p < 0.001), Hispanic/Latinx (HL) (9.0% vs. 17%; uOR [95% CI], 0.48 [0.43-0.54]; p < 0.001), Asian/Pacific Islander (Asian/PI) (11% vs. 17%; uOR [95% CI], 0.84 [0.78-0.91]; p < 0.001), and other race/ethnicity (12% vs. 17%; uOR [95% CI], 0.68 [0.57-0.81]; p < 0.001) patients. In multivariable models, the adjusted odds of IHT remained significantly lower for HL (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.76 [0.72-0.83]; p < 0.001) and Asian/PI patients (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.73 [0.62-0.86]; p < 0.001) but not for non-Hispanic Black and other race/ethnicity patients ( p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In a nationally representative sample of emergency departments across the United States, patients of minority race/ethnicity presenting with complex EGS disease were less likely to undergo IHT when compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Disparities persisted for HL and Asian/PI patients when controlling for comorbid conditions, hospital and residential geography, neighborhood socioeconomic status, and insurance; these patients may face unique barriers in accessing surgical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

Greater spatial access to care is associated with lower mortality for emergency general surgery

BACKGROUND

Emergency general surgery (EGS) diseases are time-sensitive conditions that require urgent surgical evaluation, yet the effect of geographic access to care on outcomes remains unclear. We examined the association of spatial access with outcomes for common EGS conditions.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of twelve 2014 State Inpatient Databases, identifying adults admitted with eight EGS conditions, was performed. We assessed spatial access using the spatial access ratio (SPAR)-an advanced spatial model that accounts for travel distance, hospital capacity, and population demand, normalized against the national mean. Multivariable regression models adjusting for patient and hospital factors were used to evaluate the association between SPAR with (a) in-hospital mortality and (b) major morbidity.

RESULTS

A total of 877,928 admissions, of which 104,332 (2.4%) were in the lowest-access category (SPAR, 0) and 578,947 (66%) were in the high-access category (SPAR, ≥1), were analyzed. Low-access patients were more likely to be White, male, and treated in nonteaching hospitals. Low-access patients also had higher incidence of complex EGS disease (low access, 31% vs. high access, 12%; p < 0.001) and in-hospital mortality (4.4% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.05). When adjusted for confounding factors, including presence of advanced hospital resources, increasing spatial access was protective against in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.97; p < 0.001). Spatial access was not significantly associated with major morbidity.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to demonstrate that geospatial access to surgical care is associated with incidence of complex EGS disease and that increasing spatial access to care is independently associated with lower in-hospital mortality. These results support the consideration of spatial access in the development of regional health systems for EGS care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

Estimated Carbon Emissions Savings With Shifts From In-Person Visits to Telemedicine for Patients With Cancer

IMPORTANCE

While the health care community advocates broadly for climate change policy, medical professionals can look within care practices to assess their contribution to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and provide solutions wherever possible. Telemedicine can help in mitigating climate change by providing care from a distance.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the carbon savings achieved from telemedicine visits.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study of telemedicine visits was conducted at a single-institution National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer center. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and above, completed telemedicine visits from April 1, 2020, to June 20, 2021, and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record. Groups were divided between those within driving time of 60 minutes (1-way) to the cancer center vs those living beyond 60 minutes of drive time. Data were analyzed between April 2020 and June 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Carbon emission savings from telemedicine, measured in total and average per-visit savings.

RESULTS

A total 49 329 telemedicine visits with 23 228 patients were conducted from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021. A total 21 489 visits were for patients with driving time of 60 minutes or less (median [IQR] age, 62.0 [52.0-71.0] years; 12 334 [57.4%] female; 1685 [7.8%] Black, 1500 [7.0%] Hispanic, 16 010 [74.5%] non-Hispanic White), while 27 840 visits were for patients with driving time greater than 60 minutes (median [IQR] age, 67.0 [57.0-74.0] years; 14 372 [51.6%] female; 1056 [3.8%] Black, 1364 [5.0%] Hispanic, 22 457 [80.7%] non-Hispanic White). For patients living within a driving time of 60 minutes from the cancer center, 424 471 kg CO2 emissions were saved (mean [SD] emissions savings, 19.8 [9.4] kg CO2 per visit) due to telemedicine-equivalent to 91.5 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year. For patients whose driving distance was greater than 60 minutes, 2 744 248 kg CO2 emissions were saved (mean emissions savings, 98.6 [54.8] kg CO2 per visit)-equivalent to 591 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Using a large data set, this cross-sectional analysis highlighted the carbon emissions savings due to telemedicine in oncology. This has important implications in reducing health care-related carbon footprint.

Estimated Indirect Cost Savings of Using Telehealth Among Nonelderly Patients With Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Patients with cancer typically have greater financial hardships and time costs than individuals without cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this, while posing substantial challenges to delivering cancer care and resulting in important changes in care-delivery models, including the rapid adoption of telehealth.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate patient travel, time, and cost savings associated with telehealth for cancer care delivery.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

An economic evaluation of cost savings from completed telehealth visits from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, in a single-institution National Cancer Institute-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All patients aged 18 to 65 years who completed telehealth visits within the designated time frame and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record were included in the study cohort. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to June 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was estimated patient cost savings from telehealth, which included 2 components: costs of travel (defined as roundtrip distance saved from car travel) and potential loss of productivity due to the medical visit (defined as loss of income from roundtrip travel plus loss of income from in-person clinic visits). Two different models with a combination of 2 different mileage rates ($0.56 and $0.82 per mile) and census tract-level median hourly wages were used.

RESULTS

The study included 25 496 telehealth visits with 11 688 patients. There were 4525 (3795 patients) new or established visits and 20 971 (10 049 patients) follow-up visits. Median (IQR) age was 55.0 (46.0-61.0) years among the telehealth visits, with 15 663 visits (61.4%) by women and 18 360 visits (72.0%) by Hispanic non-White patients. According to cost models, the estimated mean (SD) total cost savings ranged from $147.4 ($120.1) at $0.56/mile to $186.1 ($156.9) at $0.82/mile. For new or established visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit ranged from $176.6 ($136.3) at $0.56/mile to $222.8 ($177.4) at $0.82/mile, and for follow-up visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit was $141.1 ($115.3) at $0.56/mile to $178.1 ($150.9) at $0.82/mile.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this economic evaluation, telehealth was associated with savings in patients time and travel costs, which may reduce the financial toxicity of cancer care. Expansion of telehealth oncology services may be an effective strategy to reduce the financial burden among patients with cancer.

Disparities in Spatial Access to Emergency Surgical Services in the US

Importance

Hospitals with emergency surgical services provide essential care for a wide range of time-sensitive diseases. Commonly used measures of spatial access, such as distance or travel time, have been shown to underestimate disparities compared with more comprehensive metrics.

Objective

To examine population-level differences in spatial access to hospitals with emergency surgical capability across the US using enhanced 2-step floating catchment (E2SFCA) methods.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cross-sectional study using the 2015 American Community Survey data. National census block group (CBG) data on community characteristics were paired with geographic coordinates of hospitals with emergency departments and inpatient surgical services, and hospitals with advanced clinical resources were identified. Spatial access was measured using the spatial access ratio (SPAR), an E2SFCA method that captures distance to hospital, population demand, and hospital capacity. Small area analyses were conducted to assess both the population with low access to care and community characteristics associated with low spatial access. Data analysis occurred from February 2021 to July 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Low spatial access was defined by SPAR greater than 1.0 SD below the national mean (SPAR <0.3).

Results

In the 217 663 CBGs (median [IQR] age for CBGs, 39.7 [33.7-46.3] years), there were 3853 hospitals with emergency surgical capabilities and 1066 (27.7%) with advanced clinical resources. Of 320 million residents, 30.8 million (9.6%) experienced low access to any hospital with emergency surgical services, and 82.6 million (25.8%) to advanced-resource centers. Insurance status was associated with low access to care across all settings (public insurance: adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.12-1.25; uninsured aRR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.52-1.64). In micropolitan and rural areas, high-share (>75th percentile) Hispanic and other (Asian; American Indian, Alaska Native, or Pacific Islander; and 2 or more racial and ethnic minority groups) communities were also associated with low access. Similar patterns were seen in access to advanced-resource hospitals, but with more pronounced racial and ethnic disparities.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of access to surgical care, nearly 1 in 10 US residents experienced low spatial access to any hospital with emergency surgical services, and 1 in 4 had low access to hospitals with advanced clinical resources. Communities with high rates of uninsured or publicly insured residents and racial and ethnic minority communities in micropolitan and rural areas experienced the greatest risk of limited access to emergency surgical care. These findings support the use of E2SFCA models in identifying areas with low spatial access to surgical care and in guiding health system development.

Reducing New Ileostomy Readmissions in a Rural Health Care Setting: A Quality Improvement Initiative

BACKGROUND

Readmission after ileostomy creation continues to be a major cause of morbidity with rates ranging from 15% to 30% due to dehydration and obstruction. Rural environments pose an added risk of readmission due to larger travel distances and lack of consistent home health services.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to reduce ileostomy-related readmission rates in a rural academic medical center.

DESIGN

This is a rapid cycle quality improvement study.

SETTING

This single-center study was conducted in a rural academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Colorectal surgery patients receiving a new ileostomy were included in this study.

INTERVENTIONS

Improvement initiatives were identified through Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles (enhanced team continuity, standardized rehydration, nursing/staff education).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Thirty-day readmission, average length of stay, and average time to readmission served as main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Roughly equal rates of ileostomy were created in each time point, consistent with a tertiary care colorectal practice. The preimplementation readmission rate was 29%. Over the course of the entire quality improvement initiative, re-admission rates decreased by more than 50% (29% to 14%). PDSA cycle 1, which involved integrating a service-specific physician assistant to the team, allowed for greater continuity of care and had the most dramatic effect, decreasing rates by 27.5% (29% to 21%). Standardization of oral rehydration therapy and the implementation of a patient-directed intake/output sheet during PDSA cycle 2 resulted in further improvement in readmission rates (21% to 15%). Finally, implementation of nurse and physician assistant (PA)-driven patient education on fiber supplementation resulted in an additional yet nominal decrease in readmissions (15% to 14%). Latency to readmission also significantly increased throughout the study period.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its small sample size in a single-center study.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of initiatives targeting enhanced team continuity, the standardization of rehydration therapies, and improved patient education decreased readmission rates in patients with new ileostomies. Rural centers, where outpatient resources are not as readily available or accessible, stand to benefit the most from these types of targeted interventions to decrease readmission rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B771.

REDUCCIN EN LAS READMISIONES POR ILEOSTOMAS NE MEDIOS DE ATENCIN MDICA RURAL INICIATIVA DE MEJORA EN LA CALIDAD

ANTECEDENTES:La readmisión después de la creación de una ileostomía sigue siendo una de las principales causas de morbilidad con tasas que oscilan entre el 15% y el 30% debido a la deshidratación y la oclusión. Un entorno rurale presenta un riesgo adicional de readmisión debido a las mayores distancias de viaje y la falta de servicios de salud domiciliarios adecuados.OBJETIVO:Reducir las tasas de reingreso por ileostomía en un centro médico académico rural.DISEÑO:Estudio de mejoría de la calidad de ciclo rápido.AJUSTE:Estudio unicéntrico en una unidad de servicio médico académico rural.PACIENTES:Pacientes de cirugía colorrectal a quienes se les confeccionó una ileostomía.INTERVENCIONES:Iniciativas de mejoría identificadas a través de los ciclos Planificar-Hacer-Estudiar-Actuar (Continuidad del equipo mejorada, rehidratación estandarizada, educación de enfermería / personal).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:30 días de readmisión, duración media de la estadía hospitalaria, tiempo medio de reingreso.RESULTADOS:Se crearon tasas aproximadamente iguales de ileostomías un momento dado de tiempo, subsecuentes en la práctica colorrectal de atención terciaria. La tasa de readmisión previa a la implementación del estudio fue del 29%. En el transcurso de toda la iniciativa de mejoría en la calidad, las tasas de readmisión disminuyeron en más del 50% (29% a 14%). El ciclo 1 de PDSA, que implicó la integración en el equipo de un asistente médico específico, lo que permitió una mayor continuidad en la atención y tuvo el mayor efecto disminuyendo las tasas en un 27,5% (29% a 21%). La estandarización de una terapia de rehidratación oral y la implementación de una hoja de ingresos / perdidas dirigida al paciente durante el ciclo 2 de PDSA resultó en una mejoría adicional en las tasas de readmisión (21% a 15%). Finalmente, la implementación de la educación del paciente impulsada por enfermeras y AF sobre el consumo suplementario de dietas con fibra dio como resultado una disminución adicional, aunque nominal, de las readmisiones (15% a 14%). La latencia hasta la readmisión también aumentó significativamente durante el período de estudio.LIMITACIONES:Estudio de un solo centro con un muestreo de pequeño tamaño.CONCLUSIONES:La implementación de iniciativas dirigidas a mejorar la continuidad en el equipo, la estandarización de las terapias de rehidratación y la mejoría en la información de los pacientes disminuyeron las tasas de readmisión en todos aquellas personas con nuevas ileostomías. Los centros rurales, donde los recursos para pacientes ambulatorios no están tan fácilmente disponibles o accesibles, son los que más beneficiaron de este tipo de intervenciones específicas para reducir las tasas de readmisión. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B771. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

The Kidney Transplant Equity Index: Improving Racial and Ethnic Minority Access to Transplantation

OBJECTIVES

To develop a scalable metric which quantifies kidney transplant (KT) centers' performance providing equitable access to KT for minority patients, based on the individualized pre-listing prevalence of End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Racial and ethnic disparities for access to transplant in patients with ESRD are well described; however, variation in care among KT centers remains unknown. Furthermore, no mechanism exists that quantifies how well a KT center provides equitable access to KT for minority patients with ESRD.

METHODS

From 2013-2018, custom datasets from the United States Renal Data System and United Network for Organ Sharing were merged to calculate the Kidney Transplant Equity Index (KTEI), defined as: the number of minority patients transplanted at a center relative to the prevalence of minority patients with ESRD in each center's health service area. Markers of socioeconomic status (SES) and recipient outcomes were compared between high and low KTEI centers.

RESULTS

249 transplant centers performed 111,959 KTs relative to 475,914 non-transplanted patients with ESRD. High KTEI centers performed more KTs for Black (105.5 vs. 24, P<0.001), Hispanic (55.5 vs. 7, P<0.001), and American Indian (1.0 vs. 0.0, P<0.001) patients than low KTEI centers. In addition, high KTEI centers transplanted more patients with higher unemployment (52 vs. 44, P<0.001), worse social deprivation (53 vs. 46, P<0.001), and lower educational attainment (52 vs. 43, P<0.001). While providing increased access to transplant for minority and low SES populations, high KTEI centers had improved patient survival (HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77-0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

The KTEI is the first metric to quantify minority access to KT incorporating the pre-listing ESRD prevalence individualized to transplant centers. KTEIs uncover significant national variation in transplant practices and identify highly equitable centers. This novel metric should be used to disseminate best practices for minority and low socioeconomic patients with ESRD.

Redistribution of Outpatient Oncologic Surgical Specialty Referrals During COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Initial reports of significantly worse outcomes for cancer patients with COVID-19 led to guidelines for triaging surgical cancer treatment. We sought to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncologic surgical specialty referrals.

METHODS

We compared referrals to oncologic surgical specialty clinics at an academic tertiary care institution following implementation of stay-at-home orders in California (3/19/20-7/31/20, "COVID") to the same time period the year prior (3/19/19-7/31/19, "Pre-COVID"). The number of appointments, consulted surgical services, insurance types, acuity of diagnoses, and times from referral to first appointment (TRFA) were assessed.

RESULTS

The overall number of patients seen in matched time periods decreased by 21.6% from 900 (pre-COVID) to 705 (COVID). Proportions of patients with malignant and suspicious diagnoses, surgical and thoracic oncology visits, and Medicaid insurance differed from comparison groups during the COVID period (P < .05). Overall median (interquartile range) TRFA decreased from 14 (20) to 12 (19) days (P = .001) during COVID.

CONCLUSION

After implementation of stay-at-home orders, higher acuity and vulnerable patients were appropriately seen in oncologic surgical specialty clinics. While the long-term effects of decreased clinic visits during COVID remain uncertain, further examination of scheduling practices that led to shorter referral times may identify methods to improve timeliness of care and surgical oncologic outcomes in non-pandemic settings.

The role of community health workers in the surgical cascade: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Community health workers (CHWs) can increase access to various primary healthcare services; however, their potential for improving surgical care is under-explored. We sought to assess the role of CHWs in the surgical cascade, defined as disease screening, linkage to operative care, and post-operative care. Given the well-described literature on CHWs and screening, we focused on the latter two steps of the surgical cascade.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature. We searched for studies published in any language from January 1, 2000 to May 1, 2020 using electronic literature databases including Pubmed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar. We included articles on CHW involvement in linkage to operative care and/or post-operative surgical care. Narrative and descriptive methods were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

The initial search identified 145 articles relevant to steps in the surgical cascade. Ten studies met our inclusion criteria and were included for review. In linkage to care, CHWs helped increase surgical enrollment, provide resources for vulnerable patients, and build trust in healthcare services. Post-operatively, CHWs acted as effective monitors for surgical-site infections and provided socially isolated patients with support and linkage to additional services. The complex and wide-ranging needs of surgical patients illustrated the need to view surgical care as a continuum rather than a singular operative event.

CONCLUSION

While the current literature is limited, CHWs were able to maneuver complex medical, cultural, and social barriers to surgical care by linking patients to counseling, education, and community resources, as well as post-operative infection prevention services. Future studies would benefit from more rigorous study designs and larger sample sizes to further elucidate the role CHWs can serve in the surgical cascade.

Intersection of social vulnerability and residential diversity: Postoperative outcomes following resection of lung and colon cancer

INTRODUCTION

While the impact of demographic factors on postoperative outcomes has been examined, little is known about the intersection between social vulnerability and residential diversity on postoperative outcomes following cancer surgery.

METHODS

Individuals who underwent a lung or colon resection for cancer were identified in the 2016-2017 Medicare database. Data were merged with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention social vulnerability index and a residential diversity index was calculated. Logistic regression models were utilized to estimate the probability of postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 55 742 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent lung (39.4%) or colon (60.6%) resection, most were male (46.6%), White (90.2%) and had a mean age of 75.3 years. After adjustment for competing risk factors, both social vulnerability and residential diversity were associated with mortality and other postoperative outcomes. In assessing the intersection of social vulnerability and residential diversity, synergistic effects were noted as patients from counties with low social vulnerability and high residential diversity had the lowest probability of 30-day mortality (3.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.0-3.5) while patients from counties with high social vulnerability and low diversity had a higher probability of 30-day postoperative death (5.2%, 95% CI: 4.6-5.8; odds ratio: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03).

CONCLUSION

Social vulnerability and residential diversity were independently associated with postoperative outcomes. The intersection of these two social health determinants demonstrated a synergistic effect on the risk of adverse outcomes following lung and colon cancer surgery.

County-Level Variation in Utilization of Surgical Resection for Early-Stage Hepatopancreatic Cancer Among Medicare Beneficiaries in the USA

INTRODUCTION

Geographic variations in access to care exist in the USA. We sought to characterize county-level disparities relative to access to surgery among patients with early-stage hepatopancreatic (HP) cancer.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare Linked database from 2004 to 2015 to identify patients undergoing surgery for early-stage HP cancer . County-level information was acquired from the Area Health Resources Files (AHRF). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess factors associated with utilization of HP surgery on the county level.

RESULTS

Among 13,639 patients who met inclusion criteria, 66.9% (n = 9125) were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and 33.1% (n = 4514) of patients had liver cancer. Among patients diagnosed with early-stage liver and pancreas malignancy, two-thirds (n = 8878, 65%) underwent surgery. Marked county-level variation in the utilization of surgery was noted among patients with early-stage HP cancer ranging from 57.1% to more than 83.3% depending on which county a patient resided. After controlling for patient and tumor-related characteristics, counties with the highest quartile of patients living below the poverty level had 35% lower odds of receiving surgery for early stage HP cancer compared patients who lived in a county with the lowest proportion of patients below the poverty line (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.77). In addition, patients residing in counties with the highest surgeon-to-population ratio (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.52-2.65), as well as the highest hospital bed-to-population ratio (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.07-1.54), were more likely to undergo surgical treatment for an early-stage HP malignancy.

CONCLUSION

Area-level variations among patients undergoing surgery for early-stage HP cancer were mainly due to differences in structural measures and county-level factors. Policies targeting high-poverty counties and improvement in structural measures may reduce variations in utilization of surgery among patients diagnosed with early-stage HP cancer.

Travel Patterns among Patients Undergoing Hepatic Resection in California: Does Driving Further for Care Improve Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Better outcomes at high-volume surgical centers have driven regionalization of complex surgical care. In turn, access to high-volume centers often requires travel over longer distances. We sought to characterize travel patterns among patients who underwent a hepatectomy.

METHODS

The California Office of Statewide Health Planning database was used to identify patients who underwent hepatectomy between 2005 and 2016. Total distance traveled and whether a patient bypassed the nearest hospital that performed hepatectomy to get to a higher-volume center were assessed. Multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with bypassing a local hospital for a higher-volume center.

RESULTS

Overall, 13,379 adults underwent a hepatectomy in 229 hospitals; only 26 hospitals were high volume (> 15 cases/year). Median travel time to a hospital that performed hepatectomy was 25.2 min (IQR: 13.1-52.0). The overwhelming majority of patients (91.6%) bypassed the nearest providing hospital to seek care at a destination hospital. Among patients who bypassed a closer hospital, 75.5% went to a high-volume hospital. Outcomes at destination hospitals were improved compared with nearest hospitals (incidence of complications: 20.4% vs. 22.9% %; failure-to-rescue: 7.1% vs 10.9%; mortality 1.5% vs. 2.6%). Medicaid beneficiaries (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.56-0.85) were less likely to bypass the nearest hospital to go to a high-volume hospital; additionally, Medicaid patients were less likely to undergo hepatectomy at a high-volume hospital independent of bypassing the nearest hospital (OR 0.60, 95%CI 0.48-0.76). Among the 3703 patients who underwent hepatectomy at a low-volume center, 2126 patients had actually bypassed a high-volume hospital. Among the remaining 1577 patients, 95% of individuals would have needed to travel less than 1 additional hour to reach a high-volume center.

CONCLUSION

Roughly, one-quarter of patients undergoing hepatectomy received care at a low-volume center; nearly all of these patients either bypassed a high-volume hospital or would have needed to travel less than an additional hour to reach a high-volume center. Travel distance needs to be considered in policies and healthcare delivery design to improve care of patients undergoing hepatic resection.

Rural hospitals are not associated with worse postoperative outcomes for colon cancer surgery

PURPOSE

We sought to determine whether colorectal cancer surgery can be done safely at rural hospitals. The current study compared outcomes among rural patients who underwent colon resection at rural and nonrural hospitals.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries who underwent colon resection for cancer between 2013 and 2017 were identified using the Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files. Patients and hospitals were designated as rural based on rural-urban continuum codes. Risk-adjusted postoperative outcomes and hospitalization spending were compared among patients undergoing resection at rural versus nonrural hospitals.

RESULTS

Among 3,937 patients who resided in a rural county and underwent colon resection for cancer, mean age was 76.3 (SD: 7.1) years and 1,432 (36.4%) patients underwent operative procedure at a rural hospital. On multivariable analyses, no differences in postoperative outcomes were noted among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing colon resection for cancer at nonrural versus rural hospitals. Specifically, the risk-adjusted probability of experiencing a postoperative complication at a nonrural hospital was 15.4% (95% CI: 14.1%-16.8%) versus 16.3% (95% CI: 14.2%-18.3%) at a rural hospital (OR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.85-1.38); 30-day mortality (nonrural: 2.9%, 95% CI: 2.2-3.6 vs rural: 3.5%, 95% CI: 2.4-4.5) was also comparable. In addition, price standardized, risk-adjusted expenditures were similar at nonrural ($18,610, 95% CI: $18,037-$19,183) and rural ($19,010, 95% CI: $18,630-$19,390) hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Among rural Medicare beneficiaries who underwent a colon resection for cancer, there were no differences in postoperative outcomes among nonrural versus rural hospitals. These findings serve to highlight the importance of policies and practice guidelines that secure safe, local surgical care, allowing rural clinicians to accommodate strong patient preferences while delivering high-quality surgical care.

Use of the spatial access ratio to measure geospatial access to emergency general surgery services in California

BACKGROUND

Emergency general surgery (EGS) encompasses a spectrum of time-sensitive and resource-intensive conditions, which require adequate and timely access to surgical care. Developing metrics to accurately quantify spatial access to care is critical for this field. We sought to evaluate the ability of the spatial access ratio (SPAR), which incorporates travel time, hospital capacity, and population demand in its ability to measure spatial access to EGS care and delineate disparities.

METHODS

We constructed a geographic information science platform for EGS-capable hospitals in California and mapped population location, race, and socioeconomic characteristics. We compared the SPAR to the shortest travel time model in its ability to identify disparities in spatial access overall and for vulnerable populations. Reduced spatial access was defined as >60 minutes travel time or lowest three classes of SPAR.

RESULTS

A total of 283 EGS-capable hospitals were identified, of which 142 (50%) had advanced resources. Using shortest travel time, only 166,950 persons (0.4% of total population) experienced prolonged (>60 minutes) travel time to any EGS-capable hospital, which increased to 1.05 million (2.7%) for advanced-resource centers. Using SPAR, 11.5 million (29.5%) had reduced spatial access to any EGS hospital, and 13.9 million (35.7%) for advanced-resource centers. Rural residents had significantly decreased access for both overall and advanced EGS services when assessed by SPAR despite travel times within the 60-minute threshold.

CONCLUSION

While travel time and SPAR showed similar overall geographic patterns of spatial access to EGS hospitals, SPAR identified a greater a greater proportion of the population as having limited access to care. Nearly one third of California residents experience reduced spatial access to EGS hospitals when assessed by SPAR. Metrics that incorporate measures of population demand and hospital capacity in addition to travel time may be useful when assessing spatial access to surgical services.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Cross-sectional study, level VI.

Association of social vulnerability with the use of high-volume and Magnet recognition hospitals for hepatopancreatic cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

In an effort to improve perioperative and oncologic outcomes, there have been multiple quality improvement initiatives, including regionalization of high-risk procedures and hospital accreditation designations from independent organizations. These initiatives may, however, hinder access to high-quality surgical care for certain patients living in areas with high social vulnerability who may be disproportionally affected, leading to disparities in access and worse postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries who underwent liver or pancreas resection for cancer were identified using the 100% Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files. Hospitals were designated as high-volume based on Leapfrog criteria. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's social vulnerability index database was used to abstract social vulnerability index information based on each beneficiary's county of residence at the time of operation. The probability that a patient received care at a high-volume hospital stratified by the social vulnerability of the patient's county of residence was examined. Risk-adjusted postoperative outcomes were compared across low, average, and high levels of vulnerability at both low- and high-volume hospitals.

RESULTS

Among 16,978 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent a pancreatectomy (n = 13,393, 78%) or a liver resection (n = 3,594, 21.2%) for cancer, the mean age was 73.3 years (standard deviation: 5.8), nearly half the cohort was female (n = 7,819, 46%), and the overwhelming majority were White (n = 15,034, 88.5%). Mean social vulnerability index was 49.8 (standard deviation 24.8) and mean Charlson comorbidity index was 4.8 (standard deviation: 3). Overall, 8,251 (48.6%) of patients had their operations at a high-volume hospital, and 3,802 patients had their operations at a hospital with Magnet recognition. Age and sex were similar within the low-, average-, and high-social vulnerability index cohorts (P > .05); however, race differed across social vulnerability index groups. White patients made up 93% (n = 3,241) of the low social vulnerability index compared with 83.9% (n = 2,706) of the high-social vulnerability index group, whereas non-Whites made up 7% (n = 244) of the low-social vulnerability index group compared with 16.1% (n = 556) of the high-social vulnerability index group (P < .001). The risk-adjusted overall probability of having surgery at a high-volume hospital decreased as social vulnerability increased (odds ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.97-0.99). Risk-adjusted probability of postoperative complications increased with social vulnerability index; however, among patients with high social vulnerability, risk of postoperative complications was lower at high-volume hospitals compared with low-volume hospitals. In contrast, there was no difference in postoperative complications between hospitals with and without Magnet recognition across social vulnerability index.

CONCLUSION

Patients residing in communities characterized by a high social vulnerability index were less likely to undergo high-risk cancer surgery at a high-volume hospital. Although postoperative complications and mortality increased as social vulnerability index increased, some of the risk appeared to be mitigated by having surgery at a high-volume hospital. These data highlight the importance of access to high-quality surgical care, especially among patients who may already be more vulnerable.

Association of County-Level Social Vulnerability with Elective Versus Non-elective Colorectal Surgery

INTRODUCTION

A person's community, or lived environment, may play an important role in achieving optimal health outcomes. The objective of the current study was to assess the association of county-level vulnerability with the probability of having a non-elective colon resection. We hypothesized that individuals from areas with a high social vulnerability would be at greater risk of non-elective colon resection compared with patients from low social vulnerability areas.

METHODS

Patients aged 65-99 who underwent a colon resection for a primary diagnosis of either diverticulitis (n = 11,812) or colon cancer (n = 33,312) were identified in Medicare Part A and Part B for years 2016-2017. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate differences in probability of undergoing an elective versus non-elective operation from counties relative to county-level social vulnerability index (SVI). Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, mortality, readmission, and index hospitalization expenditure.

RESULTS

Among 45,124 patients, 11,812 (26.2%) underwent a colon resection for diverticulitis, while 33,312 (73.8%) had a resection for colon cancer; 31,012 (68.7%) patients had an elective procedure (diverticulitis n = 7291 (61.7%) vs. cancer n = 23,721 (71.2%)), while 14,112 (31.3%) had an emergent operation (diverticulitis n = 4521 (38.3%) vs. cancer n = 9591 (28.8%)). Patients with a high SVI were more likely to undergo an emergent colon operation compared with low SVI patients (43.7% vs. 40.4%) (p < 0.001). The association of high SVI with increased risk of an emergent colon operation was similar among patients with diverticulitis (emergent: low SVI 37.2% vs. high SVI 40.4%) or colon cancer (emergent: low SVI 26.0% vs. high SVI 29.9%) (both p < 0.05). On multivariable analyses, risk-adjusted probability of undergoing an urgent/emergent operation remained associated with SVI (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients residing in vulnerable communities characterized by a high SVI were more likely to undergo a non-elective colon resection for either diverticulitis or colon cancer. Patients from high SVI areas had a higher risk of postoperative complications, as well as index hospitalization expenditures; however, there were no differences in mortality or readmission rates.

Rural representation of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database

PURPOSE

SEER data are widely used to study rural-urban disparities in cancer. However, no studies have directly assessed how well the rural areas covered by SEER represent the broader rural United States.

METHODS

Public data sources were used to calculate county level measures of sociodemographics, health behaviors, health access and all cause cancer incidence. Driving time from each census tract to nearest Commission on Cancer certified facility was calculated and analyzed in rural SEER and non-SEER areas.

RESULTS

Rural SEER and non-SEER counties were similar with respect to the distribution of age, race, sex, poverty, health behaviors, provider density, and cancer screening. Overall cancer incidence was similar in rural SEER vs non-SEER counties. However, incidence for White, Hispanic, and Asian patients was higher in rural SEER vs non-SEER counties. Unadjusted median travel time was 53 min (IQR 34-82) in rural SEER tracts and 54 min (IQR 35-82) in rural non-SEER census tracts. Linear modeling showed shorter travel times across all levels of rurality in SEER vs non-SEER census tracts when controlling for region (Large Rural: 13.4 min shorter in SEER areas 95% CI 9.1;17.6; Small Rural: 16.3 min shorter 95% CI 9.1;23.6; Isolated Rural: 15.7 min shorter 95% CI 9.9;21.6).

CONCLUSIONS

The rural population covered by SEER data is comparable to the rural population in non-SEER areas. However, patients in rural SEER regions have shorter travel times to care than rural patients in non-SEER regions. This needs to be considered when using SEER-Medicare to study access to cancer care.

Quality Versus Costs Related to Gastrointestinal Surgery: Disentangling the Value Proposition

BACKGROUND

There has been a dramatic increase in worldwide health care spending over the last several decades. Operative procedures and perioperative care in the USA represent some of the most expensive episodes per patient. In view of both the rising cost of health care in general and the rising cost of surgical care specifically, policymakers and stakeholders have sought to identify ways to increase the value-improving quality of care while controlling (or diminishing) costs. In this context, we reviewed data relative to achieving the "value proposition" in the delivery of gastrointestinal surgical care.

METHODS

The National Library of Medicine online repository (PubMed) was text searched for human studies including "cost," "quality," "outcomes," "health care," "surgery," and "value." Results from this literature framed by the Donabedian conceptual model (identifying structures, processes, and outcomes), and the resulting impact of efforts to improve quality on costs.

RESULTS

The relationship between quality and costs was nuanced. Better quality care, though associated with better outcomes, was not always reported as concomitant with low costs. Moreover, some centers reported higher costs of surgical care commensurate with higher quality. Conversely, higher costs in health care delivery were not always linked to improved outcomes. While higher quality surgical care can lead to lower costs, higher costs of care were not necessarily associated with better outcomes. Strategies to improve quality, reduce cost, or achieve both simultaneously included regionalization of complex operations to high-volume centers of excellence, overall reduction in complications, introducing evidence-based improvements in perioperative care pathways including as enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), and elimination of inefficient or low-value care.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between quality and cost following gastrointestinal surgical procedure is complex. Data from the current study should serve to highlight the various means available to improve the value proposition related to surgery, as well as encourage surgeons to become more engaged in the national conversation around the Triple Aim of better health care quality, lower costs, and improved health care outcomes.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Trends in the Geospatial Distribution of Adult Inpatient Surgical Cancer Care Across the United States

INTRODUCTION

The relationship and trends of geography and travel distance to access surgical cancer care has been poorly characterized. The objective of the study was to define the geographic distribution of access to hospital-based operative cancer care across the USA.

METHODS

A cohort analysis was performed using the 2005 and 2015 American Hospital Association Annual Survey, Census Bureau Data for 2010, and the American Community Survey 5-year estimates for 2011 to 2016.

RESULTS

The number of hospitals that provided surgical services with an approved American College of Surgeons (ACS) cancer program slightly increased over the time periods examined (2005, n = 1203 vs. 2015, n = 1284; p = 0.7210). Based on geospatial analysis, 18,214,994 (5.9%) people lived more than 60 min from a hospital with a cancer program in 2005 compared with 34,630,516 (11.2%) by 2015. Communities within a 60-min drive time were more likely to be composed of individuals who completed high school (85.9% vs. 84.2%), were employed (62.7% vs. 57.1%), had a higher median household income ($67.4 k vs. $53.2 k), and lived within states that had expanded Medicaid (62.5% vs. 48.9%) (all p < 0.0001). In contrast, communities outside of a 60-min drive time had a greater proportion of individuals below the federal poverty level (18.3% vs. 16.5%; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

While the number of hospitals with ACS approved cancer program designation increased over the last decade, the number of people living greater than 60 min from an approved cancer programs nearly doubled. These data highlight worrisome geospatial trends that may make access to cancer care for certain patient populations increasingly challenging.

Association of Neighborhood Characteristics with Utilization of High-Volume Hospitals Among Patients Undergoing High-Risk Cancer Surgery

INTRODUCTION

As high-risk cancer surgery continues to become more centralized, it is important to understand the association of neighborhood characteristics relative to access to surgical care. We sought to determine the neighborhood level characteristics that may be associated with travel patterns and utilization of high-volume hospitals.

METHODS

The California Office of Statewide Health Planning database was used to identify patients who underwent pancreatectomy (PD), esophagectomy (ES), proctectomy (PR), or pneumonectomy (PN) for cancer between 2014 and 2016. Total minutes (m) traveled as well as whether a patient bypassed the nearest hospital that performed the operation to get to a higher-volume center was assessed. Data were merged with the Centers for Disease control social vulnerability index (SVI).

RESULTS

Overall, 26,937 individuals (ES: 4.7%; PN: 53.5% PD: 13.9% PR: 27.9%) underwent a complex oncologic operation. Median travel time was 16 m (interquartile range [IQR] 8.3-30.24) [ES: 21.8 m (IQR 10.6-46.9); PN: 14 m (IQR 7.8-27.0); PD: 21.2 m (IQR 10.6-42.6); PR: 15 m (IQR 8.1-28.4)]. Nearly three-quarter of patients (ES: 34%; PN: 73%; PD: 72%; LR: 81%) underwent an operation at a high-volume hospital. For all four operations, patients who resided in a county with a high overall SVI were less likely to have surgery at a high-volume hospital (ES: odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.65; PN: OR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.88; PD: OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.84; PR: OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.58-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients residing in communities of high social vulnerability were less likely to undergo high-risk cancer surgery at a high-volume hospital. The identification of society-based contextual disparities in access to complex surgical care should serve to inform targeted strategies to direct additional resources toward these vulnerable communities.

Accessing surgical care for esophageal cancer: patient travel patterns to reach higher volume center

While better outcomes at high-volume surgical centers have driven the regionalization of complex surgical care, access to high-volume centers often requires travel over longer distances. We sought to evaluate the travel patterns among patients undergoing esophagectomy to assess willingness of patients to travel for surgical care. The California Office of Statewide Health Planning database was used to identify patients who underwent esophagectomy between 2005 and 2016. Total distance traveled, as well as whether a patient bypassed the nearest hospital that performed esophagectomy to get to a higher volume center, was assessed. Overall 3,269 individuals underwent an esophagectomy for cancer in 154 hospitals; only five hospitals were high volume according to Leapfrog standards. Median travel time to a hospital that performed esophagectomy was 26 minutes (IQR: 13.1-50.7). The overwhelming majority of patients (85%) bypassed the nearest providing hospital to seek care at a destination hospital. Among patients who bypassed a closer hospital, only 36% went to a high-volume hospital. Of the 2,248 patients who underwent esophagectomy at a low-volume center, 1,491 patients had bypassed a high-volume hospital. Of the remaining 757 patients who did not bypass a high-volume hospital, half of the individuals would have needed to travel less than an additional hour to reach a high-volume center. Nearly two-thirds of patients undergoing an esophagectomy for cancer received care at a low-volume center; 85% of patients either bypassed a high-volume hospital or would have needed to travel less than an additional hour to reach a high-volume center.

CMS Hospital Compare System of Star Ratings and Surgical Outcomes Among Patients Undergoing Surgery for Cancer: Do the Ratings Matter?

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Compare star rating system has been proposed as a means to assess hospital quality performance. The current study aimed to investigate outcomes and payments among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal, lung, esophageal, pancreatic, and liver cancer across hospital star rating groups.

METHODS

The Medicare Standard Analytic Files (SAF) from 2013 to 2015 were used to derive the analytic cohort. The association of star ratings to perioperative outcomes and expenditures was examined.

RESULTS

Among 119,854 patients, the majority underwent surgery at a 3-star (n = 34,901, 29.1%) or 4-star (n = 30,492, 25.4%) hospital. Only 12.2% (n = 14,732) were treated at a 5-star hospital. Across all procedures examined, patients who underwent surgery at a 1-star hospital had greater odds of death within 90 days than patients who had surgery at a 5-star hospital (colorectal, 1.41 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.25-1.60]; lung, 1.97 [95% CI 1.56-2.48]; esophagectomy, 1.83 [95% CI 0.81-4.16]; pancreatectomy, 1.70 [95% CI 1.20-2.41]; hepatectomy, 1.63 [95% CI 0.96-2.77]). A similar trend was noted for failure to rescue (FTR), with the greatest odds of FTR associated with 1-star hospitals. The median expenditure associated with an abdominal operation was $1661 more at a 1-star hospital than at a 5-star hospital (1-star: $17,399 vs 5-star: $15,738). A similar trend was noted for thoracic operations.

CONCLUSION

The risk of FTR, 90-day mortality, and increased hospital expenditure were all higher at a 1-star hospital. Further research is needed to investigate barriers to care at 5-star-rated hospitals and to target specific interventions to improve outcomes at 1-star hospitals.

Accessing surgical care for pancreaticoduodenectomy: Patient variation in travel distance and choice to bypass hospitals to reach higher volume centers

BACKGROUND

While better outcomes at high-volume surgical centers have driven regionalization of complex surgical care, access to high-volume centers often requires travel over longer distances. We sought to evaluate travel patterns of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic cancer to assess willingness of patients to travel for surgical care.

METHODS

The California Office of Statewide Health Planning database was used to identify patients who underwent PD between 2005 and 2016. Total distance traveled, as well as whether a patient bypassed the nearest hospital that performed PD to get to a higher-volume center was assessed. Multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with bypassing a local hospital for a higher-volume center.

RESULTS

Among 23 014 patients who underwent PD, individuals traveled a median distance of 18.0 miles to get to a hospital that performed PD. The overwhelming majority (84%) of patients bypassed the nearest providing hospital and traveled a median additional 16.6 miles to their destination hospital. Among patients who bypassed the nearest hospital, 13,269 (68.6%) did so for a high-volume destination hospital. Specifically, average annual PD volume at the nearest "bypassed" vs final destination hospital was 29.6 vs 56 cases, respectively. Outcomes at bypassed vs destination hospitals varied (incidence of complications: 39.2% vs 32.4%; failure-to-rescue: 14.5% vs 9.1%). PD at a high-volume center was associated with lower mortality (OR = 0.46 95% CI, 0.22-0.95). High-volume PD ( > 20 cases) was predictive of hospital bypass (OR = 3.8 95% CI, 3.3-4.4). Among patients who had surgery at a low-volume center, nearly 20% bypassed a high-volume hospital in route. Furthermore, among patients who did not bypass a high-volume hospital, one-third would have needed to travel only an additional 30 miles or less to reach the nearest high-volume hospital.

CONCLUSION

Most patients undergoing PD bypassed the nearest providing hospital to seek care at a higher-volume hospital. While these data reflect increased regionalization of complex surgical care, nearly 1 in 5 patients still underwent PD at a low-volume center.