Rise of long‐distance urology transfer during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Identifying factors to enhance transfers of care efficiency and clinical outcomes

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY International Journal of Urology Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1111/iju.15577
Fangyi Lin, Grigori Vaserman, Evan Spencer, Muhammad Choudhury, John Phillips
{"title":"Rise of long‐distance urology transfer during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Identifying factors to enhance transfers of care efficiency and clinical outcomes","authors":"Fangyi Lin, Grigori Vaserman, Evan Spencer, Muhammad Choudhury, John Phillips","doi":"10.1111/iju.15577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to identify variables associated with clinical outcomes after urologic transfers before and during the COVID pandemic.MethodsAfter IRB approval, a retrospective chart review was performed on adult patients transferred to our institution from 01/01/2018 to 12/31/2019 (“pre‐COVID”) and from 01/02/2020 to 12/31/2022 (“COVID”). We identified demographics, origin hospitals, ICD‐10 pre‐ and post‐transfer diagnoses, distance of transfer, and post‐transfer CPT codes.ResultsDuring the study period, our adult urology service accepted 160 transfers with a mean patient age of 71 years. A total of 49/160 (30%) of subjects made up the “pre‐COVID” cohort and 111/160 (70%) made up the “COVID” cohort. There were 11/111 (10%) transfers of &gt;100 miles in the COVID period but 0/49 in the pre‐COVID period (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.02). Patients from the COVID period waited on average 1.2 days longer for a procedure after transfer compared to pre‐COVID period (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.03). The time until a patient's surgical procedure after transfer was a significant predictor of length of stay &gt; 5 days (OR 1.91, CI 1.43 – 2.58, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.01). Different diagnosis upon re‐evaluation after transfer was associated with a decreased rate of subsequent readmission (OR 0.30, CI 0.09–0.97, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.05).ConclusionsLong‐distance transfer, even &gt;100 miles (which we termed “mega‐transfers”), was a new pandemic‐related phenomenon at our institution. Delays in definitive care and changes in diagnoses after transfer were associated with readmission and length of stay. Our findings illustrate the importance of inter‐institutional communication, diagnostic accuracy, and post discharge planning when managing transfer patients.","PeriodicalId":14323,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.15577","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to identify variables associated with clinical outcomes after urologic transfers before and during the COVID pandemic.MethodsAfter IRB approval, a retrospective chart review was performed on adult patients transferred to our institution from 01/01/2018 to 12/31/2019 (“pre‐COVID”) and from 01/02/2020 to 12/31/2022 (“COVID”). We identified demographics, origin hospitals, ICD‐10 pre‐ and post‐transfer diagnoses, distance of transfer, and post‐transfer CPT codes.ResultsDuring the study period, our adult urology service accepted 160 transfers with a mean patient age of 71 years. A total of 49/160 (30%) of subjects made up the “pre‐COVID” cohort and 111/160 (70%) made up the “COVID” cohort. There were 11/111 (10%) transfers of >100 miles in the COVID period but 0/49 in the pre‐COVID period (p = 0.02). Patients from the COVID period waited on average 1.2 days longer for a procedure after transfer compared to pre‐COVID period (p = 0.03). The time until a patient's surgical procedure after transfer was a significant predictor of length of stay > 5 days (OR 1.91, CI 1.43 – 2.58, p < 0.01). Different diagnosis upon re‐evaluation after transfer was associated with a decreased rate of subsequent readmission (OR 0.30, CI 0.09–0.97, p = 0.05).ConclusionsLong‐distance transfer, even >100 miles (which we termed “mega‐transfers”), was a new pandemic‐related phenomenon at our institution. Delays in definitive care and changes in diagnoses after transfer were associated with readmission and length of stay. Our findings illustrate the importance of inter‐institutional communication, diagnostic accuracy, and post discharge planning when managing transfer patients.
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
COVID-19 大流行期间泌尿外科长途转运的兴起:确定提高转运效率和临床结果的因素
方法经 IRB 批准后,我们对 2018 年 1 月 1 日至 2019 年 12 月 31 日("COVID 前")和 2020 年 2 月 1 日至 2022 年 12 月 31 日("COVID")转入我院的成人患者进行了回顾性病历审查。我们确定了人口统计学、原籍医院、转院前和转院后的 ICD-10 诊断、转院距离和转院后的 CPT 代码。结果在研究期间,我们的成人泌尿外科接受了 160 例转院,患者平均年龄为 71 岁。49/160(30%)的受试者属于 "COVID 前 "人群,111/160(70%)的受试者属于 "COVID 后 "人群。在 COVID 期间,有 11/111 人(10%)的转院距离为 100 英里,而在 COVID 前期间,转院距离为 0/49 英里(p = 0.02)。与 COVID 之前相比,COVID 期间的患者在转院后等待手术的时间平均延长了 1.2 天(p = 0.03)。转院后患者接受手术的时间是住院时间长达 5 天的重要预测因素(OR 1.91,CI 1.43 - 2.58,p = 0.01)。结论远距离转院,甚至是 100 英里(我们称之为 "超大型转院"),在我们医院是一种与大流行相关的新现象。转院后明确治疗的延迟和诊断的改变与再次入院和住院时间有关。我们的研究结果表明,在管理转院病人时,机构间的沟通、诊断的准确性和出院后的规划非常重要。
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
International Journal of Urology
International Journal of Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
11.50%
发文量
340
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: International Journal of Urology is the official English language journal of the Japanese Urological Association, publishing articles of scientific excellence in urology. Submissions of papers from all countries are considered for publication. All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation.
期刊最新文献
Comparative clinical trials with a novel approach: Utilizing the shiny method for investigational urothelial carcinoma therapies. Feasibility of approximate measurement of bladder volume in children using the Lilium α-200 portable bladder scanner. The role of lipidic balance on erectile dysfunction in prostate cancer patients undergoing robotic surgery. Efficacy and safety of dose-dense gemcitabine plus cisplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Preservation of the native urethral plate and corpus spongiosum combined with buccal mucosa graft plus Orandi's penile skin flap as an alternative to staged urethroplasty for narrow penile strictures.
×
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