The Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Program: Results from a collaborative quality initiative

Variation in Risk-Adjusted Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia Days Within a Quality Collaborative

INTRODUCTION

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is associated with increased mortality, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and longer intensive care unit stays. The rate of VAP (VAPs per 1000 ventilator days) within a hospital is an important quality metric. Despite adoption of preventative strategies, rates of VAP in injured patients remain high in trauma centers. Here, we report variation in risk-adjusted VAP rates within a statewide quality collaborative.

METHODS

Using Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Program data from 35 American College of Surgeons-verified Level I and Level II trauma centers between November 1, 2020 and January 31, 2023, a patient-level Poisson model was created to evaluate the risk-adjusted rate of VAP across institutions given the number of ventilator days, adjusting for injury severity, physiologic parameters, and comorbid conditions. Patient-level model results were summed to create center-level estimates. We performed observed-to-expected adjustments to calculate each center's risk-adjusted VAP days and flagged outliers as hospitals whose confidence intervals lay above or below the overall mean.

RESULTS

We identified 538 VAP occurrences among a total of 33,038 ventilator days within the collaborative, with an overall mean of 16.3 VAPs per 1000 ventilator days. We found wide variation in risk-adjusted rates of VAP, ranging from 0 (0-8.9) to 33.0 (14.4-65.1) VAPs per 1000 d. Several hospitals were identified as high or low outliers.

CONCLUSIONS

There exists significant variation in the rate of VAP among trauma centers. Investigation of practices and factors influencing the differences between low and high outlier institutions may yield information to reduce variation and improve outcomes.

Hospital variation in adoption of balanced transfusion practices among injured patients requiring blood transfusions

BACKGROUND

This study sought to measure hospital variability in adoption of balanced transfusion following the Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) guidelines. We hypothesized hospital adoption rates of balanced transfusion would be low, and vary significantly among hospitals after controlling for patient, injury and hospital characteristics.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This was an observational cohort study of injured adult patients (≥16 years) in Trauma Quality Improvement Program hospitals 2016-2021. Inclusion criteria were hypotensive patients receiving one transfusion of packed red blood cells, fresh frozen plasma, platelets, or cryoprecipitate. Balanced transfusion was defined as ≥1 ratio of plasma to packed red blood cells or platelets to packed red blood cells or whole blood use at 4 hours. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regression quantified residual hospital-level variability in balanced transfusion rates after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 172,457 injured patients who received transfusions, 30,386 (17.6%) underwent balanced transfusion. Patient-level balanced transfusion rates were 11% in 2016, rose to 14.0% in 2019, and jumped up once whole blood transfusions were measured to 24.0% in 2020 and to 25.9% in 2021. Approximately 26% of the variability in balanced transfusion rates was attributable to the hospital. Verified level I hospitals had a 2.09 increased adjusted odds of balanced transfusion (95% CI 1.88-2.21) compared to nonverified hospitals. University teaching status had a 1.29 increased adjusted odds of balanced transfusion (95% CI 1.08-1.54) compared with community hospitals. Overall, 150 (23.5%) hospitals were high outliers (high performing) in balanced transfusion adoption and 124 (19.4%) hospitals were low outliers.

CONCLUSION

There was significant variability in hospital adoption of balanced transfusion.

Calculation and Feedback of Risk-Adjusted Antibiotic Days as a Process Measure in a Statewide Trauma Collaborative

BACKGROUND

Optimization of antibiotic stewardship requires determining appropriate antibiotic treatment and duration of use. Our current method of identifying infectious complications alone does not attempt to measure the resources actually utilized to treat infections in patients. We sought to develop a method accounting for treatment of infections and length of antibiotic administration to allow benchmarking of trauma hospitals with regard to days of antibiotic use.

METHODS

Using trauma quality collaborative data from 35 American College of Surgeons (ACS)-verified level I and level II trauma centers between November 1, 2020, and January 31, 2023, a two-part model was created to account for (1) the odds of any antibiotic use, using logistic regression; and (2) the duration of usage, using negative binomial distribution. We adjusted for injury severity, presence/type of infection (eg, ventilator-acquired pneumonia), infectious complications, and comorbid conditions. We performed observed-to-expected adjustments to calculate each center's risk-adjusted antibiotic days, bootstrapped Observed/Expected (O/E) ratios to create confidence intervals, and flagged potential high or low outliers as hospitals whose confidence intervals lay above or below the overall mean.

RESULTS

The mean antibiotic treatment days was 1.98°days with a total of 88,403 treatment days. A wide variation existed in risk-adjusted antibiotic treatment days (.76°days to 2.69°days). Several hospitals were identified as low (9 centers) or high (6 centers) outliers.

CONCLUSION

There exists a wide variation in the duration of risk-adjusted antibiotic use amongst trauma centers. Further study is needed to address the underlying cause of variation and for improved antibiotic stewardship.

Linking Trauma Registry Patients With Insurance Claims: Creating a Longitudinal Patient Record

INTRODUCTION

Trauma registries and their quality improvement programs only collect data from the acute hospital admission, and no additional information is captured once the patient is discharged. This lack of long-term data limits these programs' ability to affect change. The goal of this study was to create a longitudinal patient record by linking trauma registry data with third party payer claims data to allow the tracking of these patients after discharge.

METHODS

Trauma quality collaborative data (2018-2019) was utilized. Inclusion criteria were patients age ≥18, ISS ≥5 and a length of stay ≥1 d. In-hospital deaths were excluded. A deterministic match was performed with insurance claims records based on the hospital name, date of birth, sex, and dates of service (±1 d). The effect of payer type, ZIP code, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis specificity and exact dates of service on the match rate was analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall match rate between these two patient record sources was 27.5%. There was a significantly higher match rate (42.8% versus 6.1%, P < 0.001) for patients with a payer that was contained in the insurance collaborative. In a subanalysis, exact dates of service did not substantially affect this match rate; however, specific International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes (i.e., all 7 characters) reduced this rate by almost half.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated the successful linkage of patient records in a trauma registry with their insurance claims. This will allow us to the collect longitudinal information so that we can follow these patients' long-term outcomes and subsequently improve their care.

Association of Discontinuing Preinjury Beta-Adrenergic Blockade Medications With Mortality in Severe Blunt Traumatic Brian Injury

Background

Beta-adrenergic receptor blocker (BB) administration has been shown to improve survival after traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, studies to date that observe a benefit did not distinguish between continuation of preinjury BB versus de novo initiation of BB.

Objectives

To determine the effect of continuation of preinjury BB and de novo initiation of BB on risk-adjusted mortality and complications for patients with TBI.

Methods

Trauma quality collaborative data (2016-2021) were analyzed. Patients were excluded with hospitalization <48 hours, direct admission, or penetrating injury. Severe TBI was identified as a head abbreviated injury scale (AIS) value of 3 to 5. Patients were placed into 4 groups based on the preinjury BB use and administration of BB during hospitalization. Propensity score matching was used to create 1:1 matched cohorts of patients for comparisons. Odd ratios of mortality accounting for hospital clustering were calculated. A sensitivity analysis was performed excluding patients with AIS >2 injuries in all other body regions to create a cohort of isolated TBI patients.

Results

A total of 15,153 patients treated at 35 trauma centers were available for analysis. Patients were divided into 4 cohort groupings related to preinjury BB use and postinjury receipt of BB. The odds of mortality was significantly reduced for patients with a TBI on a preinjury BB who had the medication continued in the acute setting (as compared with patients on preinjury BB who did not) (odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.98; P = 0.04). Patients with a TBI who were not on preinjury BB did not benefit from de novo initiation of BB with regard to mortality (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.08; P = 0.2). In the sensitivity analysis, excluding polytrauma patients, patients on preinjury BB who had BB continued had a reduction in mortality when compared with patients in which BB was stopped following a TBI (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47-0.91; P = 0.01).

Conclusions

Continuing BB is associated with reduced odds of mortality in patients with a TBI on preinjury BB. We were unable to demonstrate benefit from instituting beta blockade in patients who are not on a BB preinjury.

How do we PI? Results of an EAST quality, patient safety, and outcomes survey

BACKGROUND

Quality improvement is a cornerstone for any verified trauma center. Conducting effective quality and performance improvement, however, remains a challenge. In this study, we sought to better explore the landscape and challenges facing the members of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) through a survey.

METHODS

A survey was designed by the EAST Quality Patient Safety and Outcomes Committee. It was reviewed by the EAST Research and Scholarship Committee and then distributed to 2511 EAST members. The questions were designed to understand the frequency, content, and perceptions surrounding quality improvement processes.

RESULTS

There were 151 respondents of the 2511 surveys sent (6.0%). The majority were trauma faculty (55%) or trauma medical directors (TMDs) (37%) at American College of Surgeons level I (62%) or II (17%) trauma centers. We found a wide variety of resources being used across hospitals with the majority of cases being identified by a TMD or attending (81%) for a multidisciplinary peer review (70.2%). There was a statistically significant difference in the perception of the effectiveness of the quality improvement process with TMDs being more likely to describe their process as moderately or very effective compared with their peers (77.5% vs. 57.7%, p=0.026). The 'Just Culture' model appeared to have a positive effect on the process improvement environment, with providers less likely to report a non-conducive environment (10.9% vs. 27.6%, p=0.012) and less feelings of assigning blame (3.1% vs. 13.8%, p=0.026).

CONCLUSION

Case review remains an essential but challenging process. Our survey reveals a need to continue to advocate for appropriate time and resources to conduct strong quality improvement processes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiological study, level III.

Children's surgery verification and value-based care in pediatric surgery

With the prevailing focus on increasing value in healthcare, understanding the different components of the value equation is of primary importance. Michael E. Porter's writings on the value agenda and the use of integrated practice units (IPUs) have provided easy correlation to adult disease entities with large populations sharing common pathways and providers in the diagnosis and care of these patients. In pediatric surgery, with smaller populations and larger numbers of rare or unique conditions and anatomic challenges, utilizing the concept of an IPU is more challenging. The literature has generally shown the improvements in quality of care through participation in various programs through the American College of Surgeons (ACS) such as trauma verification, or the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP), but that participation alone does not guarantee better outcomes. Use of these programs in conjunction with participation in quality collaboratives have tended to show favorable returns on investment for these programs. We seek to demonstrate how the Children's Surgery Verification (CSV) program provides pediatric surgeons an effective vehicle with which to engage the value agenda, evaluating and improving care over the care continuum in order to improve the function of children's hospitals as larger integrated units.

Heterogeneity in Surgical Quality Improvement in Michigan

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in 30-day postoperative outcomes and individual hospital variation in outcomes from 2012 to 2019 in a collaborative quality improvement network.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Collaborative quality improvement efforts have been shown to improve postoperative outcomes overall; however, heterogeneity in improvement between participating hospitals remains unclear. Understanding the distribution of individual hospital-level changes is necessary to inform resource allocation and policy design.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 51 hospitals in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) from 2012 to 2019. Risk-and reliability-adjusted hospital rates of 30-day mortality, complications, serious complications, emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and reoperations were calculated for each year and compared between the last 2 years and the first 2 years of the study period.

RESULTS

There was a significant decrease in the rates of all 5 adverse outcomes across MSQC hospitals from 2012 to 2019. Of the 51 individual hospitals, 31 (61%) hospitals achieved a decrease in mortality (range -1.3 percentage points to +0.6 percentage points), 40 (78%) achieved a decrease in complications (range -8.5 percentage points to +2.9 percentage points), 26 (51%) achieved a decrease in serious complications (range -3.2 percentage points to +3.0 percentage points), 29 (57%) achieved a decrease in ED visits (range 5.0 percentage points to +2.2 percentage points), 46 (90%) achieved a decrease in readmissions (range -3.1 percentage points to +0.4 percentage points) and 39 (76%) achieved a decrease in reoperations (range 3.3 percentage points to +1.0 percentage points).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite overall improvement in surgical outcomes across hospitals participating in a quality improvement collaborative, there was substantial variation in improvement between hospitals, highlighting opportunities to better understand hospital-level barriers and facilitators to surgical quality improvement.

Sources of Postacute Care Episode Payment Variation After Traumatic Hip Fracture Repair Among Medicare Beneficiaries: Cross-Sectional Retrospective Study

The objective of this study was to evaluate how much variation in postacute care (PAC) spending after traumatic hip fracture exists between hospitals, and to what degree this variation is explained by patient factors, hospital factors, PAC setting, and PAC intensity.

Background

Traumatic hip fracture is a common and costly event. This is particularly relevant given our aging population and that a substantial proportion of these patients are discharged to PAC settings.

Methods

It is a cross-sectional retrospective study. In a retrospective review using Medicare claims data between 2014 and 2019, we identified PAC payments within 90 days of hospitalization discharges and grouped hospitals into quintiles of PAC spending. The degree of variation present in PAC spending across hospital quintiles was evaluated after accounting for patient case-mix factors and hospital characteristics using multivariable regression models, adjusting for PAC setting choice by fixing the proportion of PAC discharge disposition across hospital quintiles, and adjusting for PAC intensity by fixing the amount of PAC spending across hospital quintiles. The study pool included 125,745 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent operative management for traumatic hip fracture in 2078 hospitals. The primary outcome was PAC spending within 90 days of discharge following hospitalization for traumatic hip fracture.

Results

Mean PAC spending varied widely between top versus bottom spending hospital quintiles ($31,831 vs $17,681). After price standardization, the difference between top versus bottom spending hospital quintiles was $8,964. Variation between hospitals decreased substantially after adjustment for PAC setting ($25,392 vs $21,274) or for PAC intensity ($25,082 vs $21,292) with little variation explained by patient or hospital factors.

Conclusions

There was significant variation in PAC payments after a traumatic hip fracture between the highest- and lowest-spending hospital quintiles. Most of this variation was explained by choice of PAC discharge setting and intensity of PAC spending, not patient or hospital characteristics. These findings suggest potential systems-level inefficiencies that can be targeted for intervention to improve the appropriateness and value of healthcare spending.

Application of power analysis to determine the optimal reporting time frame for use in statewide trauma system quality reporting

BACKGROUND

Meaningful reporting of quality metrics relies on detecting a statistical difference when a true difference in performance exists. Larger cohorts and longer time frames can produce higher rates of statistical differences. However, older data are less relevant when attempting to enact change in the clinical setting. The selection of time frames must reflect a balance between being too small (type II errors) and too long (stale data). We explored the use of power analysis to optimize time frame selection for trauma quality reporting.

METHODS

Using data from 22 Level III trauma centers, we tested for differences in 4 outcomes within 4 cohorts of patients. With bootstrapping, we calculated the power for rejecting the null hypothesis that no difference exists amongst the centers for different time frames. From the entire sample for each site, we simulated randomly generated datasets. Each simulated dataset was tested for whether a difference was observed from the average. Power was calculated as the percentage of simulated datasets where a difference was observed. This process was repeated for each outcome.

RESULTS

The power calculations for the 4 cohorts revealed that the optimal time frame for Level III trauma centers to assess whether a single site's outcomes are different from the overall average was 2 years based on an 80% cutoff.

CONCLUSION

Power analysis with simulated datasets allows testing of different time frames to assess outcome differences. This type of analysis allows selection of an optimal time frame for benchmarking of Level III trauma center data.

Achievement of Key Performance Indicators in Initial Assessment and Care of Injured Patients in Ghanaian Non-tertiary Hospitals: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to determine the level of achievement of key performance indicators (KPIs) during initial assessment and management of injured persons, as assessed by independent observers, at district and regional hospitals in Ghana.

METHODS

Trained observers were stationed at emergency units of six district (first level) and two regional (referral) hospitals, from October 2020 to February 2021, to observe management of injured patients by health service providers. Achievement of KPIs was assessed for all injured patients and for seriously injured patients (admitted for ≥ 24 h, referred, or died).

RESULTS

Management of 1006 injured patients was observed. Road traffic crash was the most common mechanism (63%). Completion of initial triage ranged from 65% for oxygen saturation to 92% for mobility assessment. For primary survey, airway was assessed in 77% of patients, chest examination performed in 66%, and internal abdominal bleeding assessed in 43%. Reassessment rates were low, ranging from 16% for respiratory rate to 23% for level of consciousness. Thirty-one percent of patients were seriously injured. Completion of KPIs was higher for these patients, but reassessment remained low, ranging from 25% for respiratory rate to 33% for level of consciousness.

CONCLUSION

KPIs were performed at a high level, but several specific elements should be performed more frequently, such as oxygen saturation and assessment for internal abdominal bleeding. Reassessment needs to be performed more frequently, especially for seriously injured patients. Overall, care for the injured at non-tertiary hospitals in Ghana could be improved with a more systematic approach.

Evaluating the complex association between Social Vulnerability Index and trauma mortality

INTRODUCTION

Social determinants of health are known to impact patient-level outcomes, but they are often difficult to measure. The Social Vulnerability Index was created by the Centers for Disease Control to identify vulnerable communities using population-based measures. However, the relationship between SVI and trauma outcomes is poorly understood.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we merged SVI data with a statewide trauma registry and used three analytic models to evaluate the association between SVI quartile and inpatient trauma mortality: (1) an unadjusted model, (2) a claims-based model using only covariates available to claims datasets, and (3) a registry-based model incorporating robust clinical variables collected in accordance with the National Trauma Data Standard.

RESULTS

We identified 83,607 adult trauma admissions from January 1, 2017, to September 30, 2020. Higher SVI was associated with worse mortality in the unadjusted model (odds ratio, 1.72 [95% confidence interval, 1.30-2.29] for highest vs. lowest SVI quintile). A weaker association between SVI and mortality was identified after adjusting for covariates common to claims data. Finally, there was no significant association between SVI and inpatient mortality after adjusting for covariates common to robust trauma registries (adjusted odds ratio, 1.10 [95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.53] for highest vs. lowest SVI quintile). Higher SVI was also associated with a higher likelihood of presenting with penetrating injuries, a shock index of >0.9, any Abbreviated Injury Scale score of >5, or in need of a blood transfusion (p < 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

Patients living in communities with greater social vulnerability are more likely to die after trauma admission. However, after risk adjustment with robust clinical covariates, this association was no longer significant. Our findings suggest that the inequitable burden of trauma mortality is not driven by variation in quality of treatment, but rather in the lethality of injuries. As such, improving trauma survival among high-risk communities will require interventions and policies that target social and structural inequities upstream of trauma center admission.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic / Epidemiologic, Level IV.

Failure to Rescue in Trauma: Early and Late Mortality in Low and High Performing Trauma Centers

BACKGROUND

Failure to Rescue (FTR) is defined as mortality following a complication. FTR has come under scrutiny as a quality metric to compare trauma centers. In contrast to elective surgery, trauma has an early period of high expected mortality due to injury sequelae rather than a complication. Here, we report FTR in early and late mortality using an externally validated trauma patient database, hypothesizing that centers with higher risk-adjusted mortality rates have higher risk-adjusted FTR rates.

METHODS

The study included 114,220 patients at 34 Level I and II trauma centers in a statewide quality collaborative (2016-2020) with ISS ≥5. Emergency room deaths were excluded. Multivariate regression models were used to produce center-level adjusted rates for mortality and major complications. Centers were ranked on adjusted mortality rate and divided into quintiles. Early deaths (within 48 hours of presentation) and late deaths (after 48 hours) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 6.7% of patients had a major complication and 3.1% died. There was no difference in the mean risk-adjusted complication rate amongst the centers. FTR was significantly different across the quintiles (13.8% at the very low mortality centers vs. 23.4% at the very high mortality centers, p < 0.001). For early deaths, there was no difference in FTR rates amongst the highest and lowest mortality quintiles. For late deaths, there was a twofold increase in the FTR rate between the lowest and highest mortality centers (9.7% vs. 19.3%, p < 0.001), despite no difference in the rates of major complications (5.9% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-performing trauma centers have higher mortality rates and lower rates of rescue following major complications. These differences are most evident in patients who survive the first 48 hours after injury. A better understanding of the complications and their role in mortality after 48 hours is an area of interest for quality improvement efforts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Decreasing time to antibiotic administration in open fractures of the femur and tibia through performance improvement in a statewide trauma: Collaborative quality initiative

BACKGROUND

Open long-bone fractures represent a complex injury within the trauma system. Guidelines recommend antibiotics be given within 60 minutes of patient arrival to the emergency department. We sought to measure and improve the timeliness of antibiotic administration at the patient, hospital, and population level within a collaborative quality initiative.

METHODS

Trauma collaborative quality initiative data (January 2017 to December 2020) were analyzed from 34 American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma verified level 1 and level 2 trauma centers. Inclusion criteria were adult patients (≥16 years), injury severity score ≥5, and open tibia or femur fracture. After the baseline year, hospitals were scored annually on a pay-for-performance metric based on patients receiving antibiotics within 120 minutes of emergency department arrival. Univariate tests examined the differences between baseline and subsequent year(s) performance. A multivariable logistic regression assessed the factors associated with meeting this target time.

RESULTS

There were 2,624 patients with an open long-bone fracture. In the baseline year (2017), 76.9% of patients received antibiotics in ≤120 minutes, with a mean time of 57.9 ± 63.3 minutes. After implementing collaborative quality initiative-wide targets, performance significantly improved in subsequent years (2018, 2019, 2020). The collaborative quality initiative achieved their goal of ≥85% of patients receiving antibiotics in ≤120 minutes in 2019 (87.9%) and 2020 (88.5%), with a mean time of 43.3 ± 54.8 minutes (P < .05 vs 2017).

CONCLUSION

A pay-for-performance process measure within a statewide trauma collaborative quality initiative improved the timely administration of antibiotics to patients with open fractures. Work remains to align compliance with the guideline target of <60 minutes and to identify factors involved in the delay of administration.

Association of timing of initiation of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with outcomes in trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Patients are at a high risk for developing venous thromboembolism (VTE) following traumatic injury. We examined the relationship between timing of initiation of pharmacologic prophylaxis with VTE complications.

METHODS

Trauma quality collaborative data from 34 American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma-verified levels I and II trauma centers were analyzed. Patients were excluded if they were on anticoagulant therapy at the time of injury, had hospitalization <48 hours, or received no or nonstandard pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis (heparin drip). Patient comparison groups were based on timing of initiation of VTE prophylaxis relative to hospital presentation (0 to <24 hours, 24 to <48 hours, ≥48 hours). Risk-adjusted rates of VTE events were calculated accounting for patient factors including type of pharmacologic agent in addition to standard trauma patient confounders. A sensitivity analysis was performed excluding patients who received blood in the first 4 hours and/or patients with a significant traumatic brain injury.

RESULTS

Within the 79,386 patients analyzed, there were 1,495 (1.9%) who experienced a VTE complication and 1,437 (1.8%) who died. After adjusting for type of prophylaxis and patient factors, the risk of a VTE event was significantly increased in the 24- to <48-hour (odds ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.47; p = 0.002) and ≥48-hour (odds ratio, 2.35; 95% confidence interval, 2.04-2.70; p < 0.001) cohorts relative to patients initiated at 0 to <24 hours. These VTE event findings remained significant after exclusion of perceived higher-risk patients in a sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

Early initiation of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in stable trauma patients is associated with lower rates of VTE.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic, level III.

Validation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grading system for acute appendicitis severity

OBJECTIVE

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) developed an anatomic grading system to assess disease severity through increasing grades of inflammation. Severity grading can then be utilized in risk-adjustment and stratification of patient outcomes for clinical benchmarking. We sought to validate the AAST appendicitis grading system by examining the ability of AAST grade to predict clinical outcomes used for clinical benchmarking.

METHODS

Surgical quality program data were prospectively collected on all adult patients undergoing appendectomy for acute appendicitis at our institution between December 2013 and May 2018. The AAST acute appendicitis grade from 1 to 5 was assigned for all patients undergoing open or laparoscopic appendectomy. Primary outcomes were occurrence of major complications, any complications, and index hospitalization length of stay. Multivariable models were constructed for each outcome without and with inclusion of the AAST grade as an ordinal variable. We also developed models using International Classification of Diseases, 9th or 10th Rev.-Clinical Modification codes to determine presence of perforation for comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 734 patients underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis. The AAST score distribution included 561 (76%) in grade 1, 49 (6.7%) in grade 2, 79 (10.8%) in grade 3, 33 (4.5%) in grade 4, and 12 (1.6%) in grade 5. The mean age was 35.3 ± 14.7 years, 47% were female, 20% were nonwhite, and 69% had private insurance. Major complications, any complications, and hospital length of stay were all positively associated with AAST grade (p < 0.05). Risk-adjustment model fit improved after including AAST grade in the major complications, any complications, and length of stay multivariable regression models. The AAST grade was a better predictor than perforation status derived from diagnosis codes for all primary outcomes studied.

CONCLUSION

Increasing AAST grade is associated with higher complication rates and longer length of stay in patients with acute appendicitis. The AAST grade can be prospectively collected and improves risk-adjusted modeling of appendicitis outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prospective/Epidemiologic, Level III.

Effect of Preinjury Oral Anticoagulants on Outcomes Following Traumatic Brain Injury from Falls in Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Warfarin has been the oral anticoagulant of choice for the treatment of thromboembolic disease. However, upward of 50% of all new anticoagulant prescriptions are now for direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). Despite this, outcome data evaluating preinjury anticoagulants remain scarce following traumatic brain injury (TBI). Our study objective is to determine the effects of preinjury anticoagulation on outcomes in older adults with TBI.

METHODS

Patient data were obtained from 29 level 1 and 2 trauma centers from 2012 to June 30, 2018. Overall, 8312 patients who were aged 65 years or older, suffering a ground level fall, and with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) head score of ≥ 3 were identified. Patients were excluded if they presented with no signs of life or a traumatic mechanism besides ground level fall. Statistical comparisons were made using multivariable analyses with anticoagulant/antiplatelet use as the independent variable.

RESULTS

Of the total patients with TBI, 3293 were on antiplatelet agents (AP), 669 on warfarin, 414 on warfarin + AP, 188 on DOACs, 116 on DOAC + AP, and 3632 on no anticoagulant. There were 185 (27.7%) patients on warfarin and 43 (22.9%) on a DOAC with a combined outcome of mortality or hospice as compared to 575 (15.8%) in the no anticoagulant group (p<0.001). After adjusting for patient factors, there was an increased risk of mortality or hospice in the warfarin (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.27-2.01) and DOAC group (OR 1.67; 95% CI 1.07-2.59) as compared to no anticoagulant. Warfarin + AP was associated with an increased risk of mortality or hospice (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.18-2.21) that was not seen with DOAC + AP (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.46-1.87) as compared to no anticoagulant.

CONCLUSIONS

In older adults with TBI, preinjury treatment with warfarin or DOACs resulted in an increased risk of mortality or hospice whereas preinjury AP therapy did not increase risk. Future studies are needed with larger sample sizes to directly compare TBI outcomes associated with preinjury warfarin versus DOAC use.

Association of Hospital Participation in a Regional Trauma Quality Improvement Collaborative With Patient Outcomes

Importance

The American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP) provides feedback to hospitals on risk-adjusted outcomes. The Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Program (MTQIP) goes beyond the provision of feedback alone, focusing on collaborative quality improvement. It is unknown whether the addition of a collaborative approach to benchmark reporting improves outcomes.

Objective

To evaluate the association of hospital participation in the ACS TQIP (benchmark reporting) or the MTQIP (benchmark reporting and collaborative quality improvement) with outcomes compared with control hospitals that did not participate in either program.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study, data from the National Trauma Data Bank from 2009 to 2015 were used. A total of 2 373 130 trauma patients 16 years or older with an Injury Severity Score of 5 or more were identified from 98 ACS TQIP hospitals, 23 MTQIP hospitals, and 429 nonparticipating hospitals, based on program participation status in 2011. A difference-in-differences analytic approach was used to evaluate whether hospital participation in the ACS TQIP or the MTQIP was associated with improved outcomes compared with nonparticipation in a quality improvement program.

Exposures

Hospital participation in MTQIP, a quality improvement collaborative, compared with ACS TQIP participation and nonparticipating hospitals.

Main Outcomes and Measures

In-hospital mortality, mortality or hospice, major complications, and venous thromboembolism events were assessed.

Results

Of the 2 373 130 included trauma patients, 64.2% were men and 73.0% were white, and the mean (SD) age was 50.7 (21.9) years. After accounting for patient factors and preexisting time trends toward improved outcomes, there was a statistically significant improvement in major complications after (vs before) hospital enrollment in the MTQIP collaborative compared with nonparticipating hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.95) or ACS TQIP hospitals (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94). A similar result was observed for venous thromboembolism (MTQIP vs nonparticipating: OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69-0.88; MTQIP vs ACS TQIP: OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.95), for which MTQIP targeted specific performance improvement efforts. Hospital participation in both ACS TQIP and MTQIP was associated with improvement in mortality or hospice (ACS TQIP vs nonparticipating: OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93; MTQIP vs nonparticipating: OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.96). Hospitals participating in MTQIP achieved the lowest overall risk-adjusted mortality in the postenrollment period (4.2%; 95% CI, 4.1-4.3).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study demonstrates that hospital participation in a regional collaborative quality improvement program is associated with improved patient outcomes beyond benchmark reporting alone while promoting compliance with processes of care.

Not Further Specified: Unclassified Orthopedic Injuries in Trauma Registries, Cause for Concern?

BACKGROUND

Data accuracy is essential to obtaining correct results and making appropriate conclusions in outcomes research. Few have examined the quality of data that is used in studies involving orthopedic surgery. A nonspecific data entry has the potential to affect the results of a study or the ability to appropriately risk adjust for treatments and outcomes. This study evaluated the proportion of Not Further Specified (NFS) orthopedic injury codes found into two large trauma registries.

MATERIALS

Data from the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) from 2011 to 2015 and from the Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Program (MTQIP) 2011-2017 were used. We selected multiple orthopedic injuries classified via the Abbreviated Injury Scale, version 2005 (AIS2005) and calculated the percentage of NFS entries for each specific injury.

RESULTS

There were a substantial proportion of fractures classified as NFS in each registry, 18.5% (range 2.4%-67.9%) in MTQIP and 27% (range 6.0%-68.5%) in the NTDB. There were significantly more NFS entries when the fractures were complex versus simple in both MTQIP (34.5% versus 9.6%, P < 0.001) and the NTDB (41.8% versus 15.7%, P < 0.001). The level of trauma center affected the proportion of NFS codes differently between the registries.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of nonspecific entries in these two large trauma registries is concerning. These data can affect the results and conclusions from research studies as well as impact our ability to truly risk adjust for treatments and outcomes. Further studies should explore the reasons for these findings.

Noncompliance with American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma recommended criteria for full trauma team activation is associated with undertriage deaths

BACKGROUND

The appropriate triage of acutely injured patients within a trauma system is associated with improved rates of mortality and optimal resource utilization. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) put forward six minimum criteria (ACS-6) for full trauma team activation (TTA). We hypothesized that ACS-COT-verified trauma center compliance with these criteria is associated with low undertriage rates and improved overall mortality.

METHODS

Data from a state-wide collaborative quality initiative was used. We used data collected from 2014 through 2016 at 29 ACS verified Level I and II trauma centers. Inclusion criteria are: adult patients (≥16 years) and Injury Severity Score of 5 or less. Quantitative data existed to analyze four of the ACS-6 criteria (emergency department systolic blood pressure ≤ 90 mm Hg, respiratory compromise/intubation, central gunshot wound, and Glasgow Coma Scale score < 9). Patients were considered to be undertriaged if they had major trauma (Injury Severity Score > 15) and did not receive a full TTA.

RESULTS

51,792 patients were included in the study. Compliance with ACS-6 minimum criteria for full TTA varied from 51% to 82%. The presence of any ACS-6 criteria was associated with a high intervention rate and significant risk of mortality (odds ratio, 16.7; 95% confidence interval, 15.2-18.3; p < 0.001). Of the 1,004 deaths that were not a full activation, 433 (43%) were classified as undertriaged, and 301 (30%) had at least one ACS-6 criterion present. Undertriaged patients with any ACS-6 criteria were more likely to die than those who were not undertriaged (30% vs. 21%, p = 0.001). Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9 and need for emergent intubation were the ACS-6 criteria most frequently associated with undertriage mortality.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with ACS-COT minimum criteria for full TTA remains suboptimal and undertriage is associated with increased mortality. These data suggest that the most efficient quality improvement measure around triage should be ensuring compliance with the ACS-6 criteria. This study suggests that practice pattern modification to more strictly adhere to the minimum ACS-COT criteria for full TTA will save lives.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Care management, level III.

Variability in management of blunt liver trauma and contribution of level of American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma verification status on mortality

BACKGROUND

Patients who sustain blunt liver trauma and are treated at an American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma-verified Level I trauma center have an overall lower risk of mortality compared with patients admitted to a level II trauma center. However, elements contributing to these differences are unknown. We hypothesize that practice variation exists between trauma centers in management of blunt liver injury. Our objective is to identify practice variations and their effect on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Data from a statewide collaborative quality initiative for trauma were used. The data set contains information from 29 American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma verified Levels I and II trauma centers from 2011 to 2016. Propensity score matching was used to create cohorts of patients treated at Levels I or II trauma centers. The 1:1 matched cohorts were used to compare in-hospital mortality, management strategy, complications, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, and failure to rescue.

RESULTS

Four hundred fifty-four patients with grade 3 or higher blunt liver injury were included. Patients treated at level II trauma centers had higher in-hospital mortality than those treated at Level I trauma centers (15.4% vs 8.8%, p = 0.03). Level II trauma centers used angiography less compared with Level I centers (p = 0.007) and admitted significantly fewer patients to the ICU (p = 0.002). The ICU status was associated with reduced mortality (7.2% vs 23.9%, p < 0.001). Despite a lower rate of overall complications, Level II trauma centers were more likely to fail in rescuing their patients (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Admission with a high-grade liver injury to a Level II trauma center is associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Level II trauma centers were less likely to use angiography or admit high-grade liver injuries to the ICU. This variation in practice may lead to the inability to rescue critically ill patients. Future research should investigate contributors to underutilization of resources for patients with high-grade liver injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Care management, level IV.

External benchmarking of trauma services in New South Wales: Risk-adjusted mortality after moderate to severe injury from 2012 to 2016

BACKGROUND

Trauma centres and systems have been associated with improved morbidity and mortality after injury. However, variability in outcomes across centres within a given system have been demonstrated. Performance improvement initiatives, that utilize external benchmarking as the backbone, have demonstrated system-wide improvements in outcomes. This data driven approach has been lacking in Australia to date. Recent improvement in local data quality may provide the opportunity to engage in data driven performance improvement. Our objective was to generate risk-adjusted outcomes for the purpose of external benchmarking of trauma services in New South Wales (NSW) based on existing data standards.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of the NSW Trauma Registry. We included adults (>16 years), with an Injury Severity Score >12, that received definitive care at either Major Trauma Services (MTS) or Regional Trauma Services (RTS) between 2012-2016. Hierarchical logistic regression models were then used to generate risk-adjusted outcomes. Our outcome measure was in-hospital death. Demographics, vital signs, transfer status, survival risk ratios, and injury characteristics were included as fixed-effects. Median odds ratios (MOR) and centre-specific odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were generated. Centre-level variables were explored as sources of variability in outcomes.

RESULTS

14,452 patients received definitive care at one of seven MTS (n = 12,547) or ten RTS (n = 1905). Unadjusted mortality was lower at MTS (9.4%) compared to RTS (11.2%). After adjusting for case-mix, the MOR was 1.33, suggesting that the odds of death was 1.33-fold greater if a patient was admitted to a randomly selected centre with worse as opposed to better risk-adjusted mortality. Definitive care at an MTS was associated with a 41% lower likelihood of death compared to definitive care at an RTS (OR 0.59 95%CI 0.35-0.97). Similar findings were present in the elderly and isolated severe brain injury subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

The NSW trauma system exhibited variability in risk-adjusted outcomes that did not appear to be explained by case-mix. A better understanding of the drivers of the described variation in outcomes is crucial to design targeted locally-relevant quality improvement interventions.