Integration of trauma and rehabilitation services is the answer to more cost-effective care

Rehabilitation outcomes based on service provision and geographical location for patients with multiple trauma: A mixed-method systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has highlighted the benefit of regionalised trauma networks in relation to decreased mortality. However, patients who now survive increasingly complex injuries continue to navigate the challenges of recovery, often with a poor view of their experiences of the rehabilitation journey. Geographical location, unclear rehabilitation outcomes and limited access to the provision of care are increasingly noted by patients as negatively influencing their view of recovery.

STUDY DESIGN

This mixed-methods systematic review included research that addresses the impact of service provision and geographical location of rehabilitation services for multiple trauma patients. The primary aim of the study was to analyse functional independence measure (FIM) outcomes. The secondary aim of the research was to examine the rehabilitation needs and experiences of multiple trauma patients by identifying themes around the barriers and challenges to rehabilitation provision. Finally, the study aimed to contribute to the gap in literature around the rehabilitation patient experience.

METHODS

An electronic search of seven databases was undertaken against pre-determined inclusion/exclusion criteria. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was utilised for quality appraisal. Following data extraction, both quantitative and qualitative analysis methods were utilised. In total, 17,700 studies were identified and screened against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria (five quantitative, four qualitative, two mixed method).

RESULTS

FIM scores showed no significant difference in all studies after long-term follow-up. However, statistically significantly less FIM improvement was noted in those with unmet needs. Patients with physiotherapist assessed unmet rehabilitation needs were statistically less likely to improve than patients whose needs were reportedly met. In contrast, there was a differing opinion regarding the success of structured therapy input, communication and coordination, long-term support and planning for home. Common qualitative themes revealed lack of rehabilitation post-discharge, often with long waiting times.

CONCLUSION

Stronger communication pathways and coordination within a trauma network, particularly when repatriating outside of a network catchment area is recommended. This review has exposed the many rehabilitation variations and complexities a patient may experience following trauma. Furthermore, this highlights the importance of arming clinicians with the tools and expertise to improve patient outcomes.

Costing alcohol-related assault in the night-time economy from a societal perspective: The case of Central Sydney

INTRODUCTION

There is a concern in many countries about violence from late-night alcohol sales and appropriate regulatory responses. However, economic losses arising from this activity rarely feature in public debate. Credible estimates are lacking because economic evaluations have not taken a 'societal perspective', costing health, policing and criminal justice outcomes. Our aims were to: (i) develop an analytic model capable of informing cost-benefit analysis of policy changes; and (ii) estimate costs of alcohol-related assault (ARA) in a major city.

METHODS

We employed decision-analytic cohort models of health and judicial consequences of ARA in Sydney, Australia. We constructed two 6-branch decision-analytic models of patient and offender pathways through the health and judicial systems. We produced overall estimates and analysed their sensitivity to key assumptions.

RESULTS

Combining results from a Health model comprising 40 pathways and 137 cost events, and a Justice model comprising 20 pathways and 48 cost events, yielded an overall cost estimate of $85 093 per ARA, of which 64% was health-related, while 36% was justice-related. Estimates were sensitive to values assigned for 'pain, suffering, morbidity and wellbeing', and to costs of incarceration. Health service-related costs accounted for 1.3% of the total.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The costs of ARA are significant and dominated by incidents in which a victim does not necessarily receive acute medical care but suffers loss in quality-of-life, and where a perpetrator is processed through the criminal justice system. Being derived transparently, within a theoretical framework, the estimates are adaptable to inform cost-benefit analyses of policy options in Australia and other countries.

Association of Medicaid Expansion With Access to Rehabilitative Care in Adult Trauma Patients

Importance

Trauma is a leading cause of death and disability for patients of all ages, many of whom are also among the most likely to be uninsured. Passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was intended to improve access to care through improvements in insurance. However, despite nationally reported changes in the payer mix of patients, the extent of the law's impact on insurance coverage among trauma patients is unknown, as is its success in improving trauma outcomes and promoting increased access to rehabilitation.

Objective

To use rigorous quasi-experimental regression techniques to assess the extent of changes in insurance coverage, outcomes, and discharge to rehabilitation among adult trauma patients before and after Medicaid expansion and implementation of the remainder of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Quasi-experimental, difference-in-difference analysis assessed adult trauma patients aged 19 to 64 years in 5 Medicaid expansion (Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New Mexico) and 4 nonexpansion (Florida, Nebraska, North Carolina, and Texas) states.

Interventions/Exposure

Policy implementation in January 2014.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Changes in insurance coverage, outcomes (mortality, morbidity, failure to rescue, and length of stay), and discharge to rehabilitation.

Results

A total of 283 878 patients from Medicaid expansion states and 285 851 patients from nonexpansion states were included (mean age [SD], 41.9 [14.1] years; 206 698 [36.3%] women). Adults with injuries in expansion states experienced a 13.7 percentage point decline in uninsured individuals (95% CI, 14.1-13.3; baseline: 22.7%) after Medicaid expansion compared with nonexpansion states. This coincided with a 7.4 percentage point increase in discharge to rehabilitation (95% CI, 7.0-7.8; baseline: 14.7%) that persisted across inpatient rehabilitation facilities (4.5 percentage points), home health agencies (2.9 percentage points), and skilled nursing facilities (1.0 percentage points). There was also a 2.6 percentage point drop in failure to rescue and a 0.84-day increase in average length of stay. Rehabilitation changes were most pronounced among patients eligible for rehabilitation coverage under the 2-midnight (8.4 percentage points) and 60% (10.2 percentage points) Medicaid payment rules. Medicaid expansion increased rehabilitation access for patients with the most severe injuries and conditions requiring postdischarge care (eg, pelvic fracture). It mitigated race/ethnicity-, age-, and sex-based disparities in which patients use rehabilitation.

Conclusions and relevance

This multistate assessment demonstrated significant changes in insurance coverage and discharge to rehabilitation among adult trauma patients that were greater in Medicaid expansion than nonexpansion states. By targeting subgroups of the trauma population most likely to be uninsured, rehabilitation gains associated with Medicaid have the potential to improve survival and functional outcomes for more than 60 000 additional adult trauma patients nationally in expansion states.

Cost-Effectiveness of the Transmural Trauma Care Model (TTCM) for the Rehabilitation of Trauma Patients

OBJECTIVES

To assess the societal cost-effectiveness of the Transmural Trauma Care Model (TTCM), a multidisciplinary transmural rehabilitation model for trauma patients, compared with regular care.

METHODS

The economic evaluation was performed alongside a before-and-after study, with a convenience control group measured only afterward, and a 9-month follow-up. Control group patients received regular care and were measured before implementation of the TTCM. Intervention group patients received the TTCM and were measured after its implementation. The primary outcome was generic health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). Secondary outcomes included disease-specific HR-QOL, pain, functional status, and perceived recovery.

RESULTS

Eighty-three trauma patients were included in the intervention group and fifty-seven in the control group. Total societal costs were lower in the intervention group than in the control group, but not statistically significantly so (EUR-267; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], EUR-4,175-3011). At 9 months, there was no statistically significant between-group differences in generic HR-QOL (0.05;95 percent CI, -0.02-0.12) and perceived recovery (0.09;95 percent CI, -0.09-0.28). However, mean between-group differences were statistically significantly in favor of the intervention group for disease-specific HR-QOL (-8.2;95 percent CI, -15.0--1.4), pain (-0.84;95CI, -1.42--0.26), and functional status (-20.1;95 percent CI, -29.6--10.7). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves indicated that if decision makers are not willing to pay anything per unit of effect gained, the TTCM has a 0.54-0.58 probability of being cost-effective compared with regular care. For all outcomes, this probability increased with increasing values of willingness-to-pay.

CONCLUSIONS

The TTCM may be cost-effective compared with regular care, depending on the decision-makers willingness to pay and the probability of cost-effectiveness that they perceive as acceptable.

Cost-effectiveness of an integrated 'fast track' rehabilitation service for multi-trauma patients: A non-randomized clinical trial in the Netherlands

Background

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation has been recommended for multi-trauma patients, but there is only low-quality evidence to support its use with these patients. This study examined whether a Supported Fast track multi-Trauma Rehabilitation Service (Fast Track) was cost-effective compared to conventional trauma rehabilitation service (Care As Usual) in patients with multi-trauma from a societal perspective with a one-year follow-up.

Methods

An economic evaluation alongside a prospective, multi-center, non-randomized, controlled clinical study, was conducted in the Netherlands. The primary outcome measure was the Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Generic Quality of Life and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) of the patients were derived using the Short-form 36 Health Status Questionnaire.

Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were stated in terms of costs per unit of FIM improvement and costs per QALY. To investigate the uncertainty around the ICERs, non-parametric bootstrapping was used.

Results

In total, 132 patients participated, 65 Fast Track patients and 67 Care As Usual patients. Mean total costs per person were €18,918 higher in the Fast Track group than in the Care As Usual group. Average incremental effects on the FIM were 3.7 points (in favor of the Fast Track group) and the incremental (extra) bootstrapped costs were €19,033, resulting in an ICER for cost per FIM improvement of €5,177. Care As Usual dominated Fast Track in cost per QALY as it gave both higher QALYs and lower costs. All sensitivity analyses attested to the robustness of our results.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program for multi-trauma patients according to the supported fast track principle is promising but cost-effectiveness evidence remains inconclusive. In terms of functional outcome, Fast Track was more expensive but yielded also more effects compared to the Care As Usual group. Looking at the costs per QALYs, unfavorable ICERs were found. Given the lack of a willingness-to-pay threshold for functional recovery and the relatively short time horizon, it is not possible to draw firm conclusions about the first.

Trial registration

(Current Controlled Trials register: ISRCTN68246661).