Current opinion on emergency general surgery transfer and triage criteria

Association between timing of operative interventions and mortality in emergency general surgery

ABSTRACT

Background

Emergency general surgery (EGS) often demands timely interventions, yet data for triage and timing are limited. This study explores the relationship between hospital arrival-to-operation time and mortality in EGS patients.

Study design

We performed a retrospective cohort study using an EGS registry at four hospitals, enrolling adults who underwent operative intervention for a primary American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-defined EGS diagnosis between 2021 and 2023. We excluded patients undergoing surgery more than 72 hours after admission as non-urgent and defined our exposure of interest as the time from the initial vital sign capture to the skin incision timestamp. We assessed the association between operative timing quintiles and in-hospital mortality using a mixed-effect hierarchical multivariable model, adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, organ dysfunction, and clustering at the hospital level.

Results

A total of 1199 patients were included. The median time to operating room (OR) was 8.2 hours (IQR 4.9-20.5 hours). Prolonged time to OR increased the relative likelihood of in-hospital mortality. Patients undergoing an operation between 6.7 and 10.7 hours after first vitals had the highest odds of in-hospital mortality compared with operative times <4.2 hours (reference quintile) (adjusted OR (aOR) 68.994; 95% CI 4.608 to 1032.980, p=0.002). A similar trend was observed among patients with operative times between 24.4 and 70.9 hours (aOR 69.682; 95% CI 2.968 to 1636.038, p=0.008).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that prompt operative intervention is associated with lower in-hospital mortality rates among EGS patients. Further work to identify the most time-sensitive populations is warranted. These results may begin to inform benchmarking for triaging interventions in the EGS population to help reduce mortality rates.

Level of evidence

IV.

Timing, triage, and mode of emergency general surgery interfacility transfers in the United States: A scoping review

ABSTRACT

Interfacility transfer of emergency general surgery (EGS) patients continues to rise, especially in the context of ongoing system consolidation. This scoping review aims to identify and summarize the literature on triage, timing, and mode of interfacility emergency general surgery transfer. While common, EGS transfer systems are not optimized to improve outcomes or ensure value-based care. We identified studies investigating emergency general surgery interfacility transfer using Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library between 1990 and 2022. English studies that evaluated EGS interfacility timing, triage or transfer mode were included. Studies were assessed by two independent reviewers. Studies were limited to English-language articles in the United States. Data were extracted and summarized with a narrative synthesis of the results and gaps in the literature. There were 423 articles identified, of which 66 underwent full-text review after meeting inclusion criteria. Most publications were descriptive studies or outcomes investigations of interfacility transfer. Only six articles described issues related to the logistics behind the interfacility transfer and were included. The articles were grouped into the predefined themes of transfer timing, triage, and mode of transfer. There were mixed results for the impact of transfer timing on outcomes with heterogeneous definitions of delay and populations. Triage guidelines for EGS transfer were consensus or expert opinion. No studies were identified addressing the mode of interfacility EGS transfer. Further research should focus on better understanding which populations of patients require expedited transfer and by what mode. The lack of high-level data supports the need for robust investigations into interfacility transfer processes to optimize triage using scarce resources and optimized value-based care.

Greater patient sharing between hospitals is associated with better outcomes for transferred emergency general surgery patients

BACKGROUND

Access to emergency surgical care has declined as the rural workforce has decreased. Interhospital transfers of patients are increasingly necessary, and care coordination across settings is critical to quality care. We characterize the role of repeated hospital patient sharing in outcomes of transfers for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients.

METHODS

A multicenter study of Wisconsin inpatient acute care hospital stays that involved transfer of EGS patients using data from the Wisconsin Hospital Association, a statewide hospital discharge census for 2016 to 2018. We hypothesized that higher proportion of patients transferred between hospitals would result in better outcomes. We examined the association between the proportion of EGS patients transferred between hospitals and patient outcomes, including in-hospital morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. Additional variables included hospital organizational characteristics and patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

One hundred eighteen hospitals transferred 3,197 emergency general surgery patients over the 2-year study period; 1,131 experienced in-hospital morbidity, mortality, or extended length of stay (>75th percentile). Patients were 62 years old on average, 50% were female, and 5% were non-White. In the mixed-effects model, hospitals' proportion of patients shared was associated with lower odds of an in-hospital complication; specifically, when the proportion of patients shared between two hospitals doubled, the relative odds of any outcome changed by 0.85.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest the importance of emergent relationships between hospital dyads that share patients in quality outcomes. Transfer protocols should account for established efficiencies, familiarity, and coordination between hospitals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

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.

Emergency general surgery: impact of distance and rurality on mortality

BACKGROUND

There is debate about whether the distance from hospital, or rurality, impacts outcomes in patients admitted under emergency general surgery (EGS). The aim of this study was to determine whether distance from hospital, or rurality, affects the mortality of emergency surgical patients admitted in Scotland.

METHODS

This was a retrospective population-level cohort study, including all EGS patients in Scotland aged 16 years or older admitted between 1998 and 2018. A multiple logistic regression model was created with inpatient mortality as the dependent variable, and distance from hospital (in quartiles) as the independent variable of interest, adjusting for age, sex, co-morbidity, deprivation, admission origin, diagnosis category, operative category, and year of admission. A second multiple logistic regression model was created with a six-fold Scottish Urban Rural Classification (SURC) as the independent variable of interest. Subgroup analyses evaluated patients who required operations, emergency laparotomy, and inter-hospital transfer.

RESULTS

Data included 1 572 196 EGS admissions. Those living in the farthest distance quartile from hospital had lower odds of mortality than those in the closest quartile (OR 0.829, 95 per cent c.i. 0.798 to 0.861). Patients from the most rural areas (SURC 6) had higher odds of survival than those from the most urban (SURC 1) areas (OR 0.800, 95 per cent c.i. 0.755 to 0.848). Subgroup analysis showed that these effects were not observed for patients who required emergency laparotomy or transfer.

CONCLUSION

EGS patients who live some distance from a hospital, or in rural areas, have lower odds of mortality, after adjusting for multiple covariates. Rural and distant patients undergoing emergency laparotomy have no survival advantage, and transferred patients have higher mortality.

Factors associated with Interhospital transfers of emergency general surgery patients from emergency departments

BACKGROUND

Emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions account for over 3 million or 7.1% of hospitalizations per year in the US. Patients are increasingly transferred from community emergency departments (EDs) to larger centers for care, and a growing demand for treating EGS conditions mandates a better understanding of how ED clinicians transfer patients. We identify patient, clinical, and organizational characteristics associated with interhospital transfers of EGS patients originating from EDs in the United States.

METHOD

We analyze data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) for the years 2010-2014. Patient-level sociodemographic characteristics, clinical factors, and hospital-level factors were examined as predictors of transfer from the ED to another acute care hospital. Multivariable logistic regression analysis includes patient and hospital characteristics as predictors of transfer from an ED to another acute care hospital.

RESULTS

Of 47,442,892 ED encounters (weighted) between 2008 and 2014, 1.9% resulted in a transfer. Multivariable analysis indicates that men (Odds ratio (OR) 1.18 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 1.16-1.21) and older patients (OR 1.02 (95% CI 1.02-1.02)) were more likely to be transferred. Relative to patients with private health insurance, patients covered by Medicare (OR 1.09 (95% CI 1.03-1.15) or other insurance (OR 1.34 (95% CI 1.07-1.66)) had a higher odds of transfer. Odds of transfer increased with a greater number of comorbid conditions compared to patients with an EGS diagnosis alone. EGS diagnoses predicting transfer included resuscitation (OR 36.72 (95% CI 30.48-44.22)), cardiothoracic conditions (OR 8.47 (95% CI 7.44-9.63)), intestinal obstruction (OR 4.49 (95% CI 4.00-5.04)), and conditions of the upper gastrointestinal tract (OR 2.82 (95% CI 2.53-3.15)). Relative to Level I or II trauma centers, hospitals with a trauma designation III or IV had a 1.81 greater odds of transfer. Transfers were most likely to originate at rural hospitals (OR 1.69 (95% CI 1.43-2.00)) relative to urban non-teaching hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Medically complex and older patients who present at small, rural hospitals are more likely to be transferred. Future research on the unique needs of rural hospitals and timely transfer of EGS patients who require specialty surgical care have the potential to significantly improve outcomes and reduce costs.