Interhospital Transfer for Emergency General Surgery: A Contemporary National Analysis.

Sara Sakowitz, S. Bakhtiyar, Zihan Gao, Saad Mallick, Amulya Vadlakonda, Troy N. Coaston, Jeffrey Balian, Nikhil L. Chervu, P. Benharash
{"title":"Interhospital Transfer for Emergency General Surgery: A Contemporary National Analysis.","authors":"Sara Sakowitz, S. Bakhtiyar, Zihan Gao, Saad Mallick, Amulya Vadlakonda, Troy N. Coaston, Jeffrey Balian, Nikhil L. Chervu, P. Benharash","doi":"10.1177/00031348241244642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nPatients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) often require complex management and transfer to higher acuity facilities, especially given increasing national efforts aimed at centralizing care. We sought to characterize factors and evaluate outcomes associated with interhospital transfer using a contemporary national cohort.\n\n\nMETHODS\nAll adult hospitalizations for EGS (appendectomy, cholecystectomy, laparotomy, lysis of adhesions, small/large bowel resection, and perforated ulcer repair) ≤2 days of admission were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients initially admitted to a different institution and transferred to the operating hospital comprised the Transfer cohort (others: Non-Transfer). Multivariable models were developed to consider the association of Transfer with outcomes of interest.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf ∼1 653 169 patients, 107 945 (6.5%) were considered the Transfer cohort. The proportion of patients experiencing interhospital transfer increased from 5.2% to 7.7% (2016-2020, P < .001). On average, Transfer was older, more commonly of White race, and of a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index. After adjustment, increasing age, living in a rural area, receiving care in the Midwest, and decreasing income quartile were associated with greater odds of interhospital transfer. Following risk adjustment, Transfer remained linked with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.64, CI 1.49-1.80), as well as any perioperative complication (AOR 1.33, CI 1.27-1.38; Reference: Non-Transfer). Additionally, Transfer was associated with significantly longer duration of hospitalization (β + 1.04 days, CI + .91-1.17) and greater costs (β+$3,490, CI + 2840-4140).\n\n\nDISCUSSION\nWhile incidence of interhospital transfer for EGS is increasing, transfer patients face greater morbidity and resource utilization. Novel interventions are needed to optimize patient selection and improve post-transfer outcomes.","PeriodicalId":325363,"journal":{"name":"The American Surgeon","volume":"102 2","pages":"31348241244642"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348241244642","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Patients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) often require complex management and transfer to higher acuity facilities, especially given increasing national efforts aimed at centralizing care. We sought to characterize factors and evaluate outcomes associated with interhospital transfer using a contemporary national cohort. METHODS All adult hospitalizations for EGS (appendectomy, cholecystectomy, laparotomy, lysis of adhesions, small/large bowel resection, and perforated ulcer repair) ≤2 days of admission were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients initially admitted to a different institution and transferred to the operating hospital comprised the Transfer cohort (others: Non-Transfer). Multivariable models were developed to consider the association of Transfer with outcomes of interest. RESULTS Of ∼1 653 169 patients, 107 945 (6.5%) were considered the Transfer cohort. The proportion of patients experiencing interhospital transfer increased from 5.2% to 7.7% (2016-2020, P < .001). On average, Transfer was older, more commonly of White race, and of a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index. After adjustment, increasing age, living in a rural area, receiving care in the Midwest, and decreasing income quartile were associated with greater odds of interhospital transfer. Following risk adjustment, Transfer remained linked with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.64, CI 1.49-1.80), as well as any perioperative complication (AOR 1.33, CI 1.27-1.38; Reference: Non-Transfer). Additionally, Transfer was associated with significantly longer duration of hospitalization (β + 1.04 days, CI + .91-1.17) and greater costs (β+$3,490, CI + 2840-4140). DISCUSSION While incidence of interhospital transfer for EGS is increasing, transfer patients face greater morbidity and resource utilization. Novel interventions are needed to optimize patient selection and improve post-transfer outcomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医院间转运急诊普通外科手术:当代国家分析
背景接受急诊普外科手术(EGS)的患者通常需要复杂的管理和转院治疗,尤其是考虑到国家越来越多地致力于集中治疗。方法在 2016-2020 年全国住院患者样本中确定了所有入院时间不超过 2 天的 EGS(阑尾切除术、胆囊切除术、开腹手术、粘连溶解术、小肠/大肠切除术和穿孔溃疡修补术)成人住院患者。最初在不同机构入院并转入手术医院的患者组成转院队列(其他:非转院)。结果 在 1 653 169 例患者中,107 945 例(6.5%)被视为转院队列。经历院际转院的患者比例从5.2%增至7.7%(2016-2020年,P < .001)。平均而言,转院患者的年龄更大,更多是白种人,Elixhauser 合并症指数更高。经过调整后,年龄增大、居住在农村地区、在中西部接受治疗以及收入四分位数降低与医院间转院的几率增大有关。经过风险调整后,转院仍与院内死亡率(AOR 1.64,CI 1.49-1.80)和任何围手术期并发症(AOR 1.33,CI 1.27-1.38;参考:非转院)的几率增加有关。此外,转院与住院时间明显延长(β+1.04 天,CI+.91-1.17)和费用增加(β+3490 美元,CI+2840-4140)有关。需要采取新的干预措施来优化患者选择并改善转院后的预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bile Duct Injuries During Urgent Cholecystectomy at a Safety Net Teaching Hospital: Attending Experience and Time of Day May Matter. From Bytes to Best Practices: Tracing ChatGPT-3.5's Evolution and Alignment With the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management. The USCENTCOM Walking Blood Bank Performance Benchmark and Anticipated Benefit of Universal Low Titer Type O Screening. Contemporary Outcomes and Patterns of Injury Associated With Parachuting Accidents. To Drain or Not: Drainage Procedures Remain a Central Tenet of Management of Infected Collections in Acute Pancreatitis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1