VTE prophylaxis within 72 hours seems safe in severe TBI

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/07/2019 - 12:30
Display Headline
VTE prophylaxis within 72 hours seems safe in severe TBI

SAN ANTONIO – Initiation of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis within 72 hours of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) reduced the odds of venous thromboembolism by 50% without increasing subsequent intracranial complications or death in a large, propensity-matched cohort study from the University of Toronto.

The investigators matched 1,234 adult patients given prophylaxis before 72 hours – the early-prophylaxis (EP) group – to 1,234 given prophylaxis at 72 hours or later – the late-prophylaxis (LP) group – based on demographics, injury characteristics, intracranial lesions, early neurosurgical procedures, and prophylaxis type.

Dr. James Byrne

EP patients had a significantly lower rate of pulmonary embolism (1.1% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.91) and deep vein thrombosis (4.2% vs. 7.9%; OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.72), with no significant increase in the risk of death (9.8% EP vs. 9% LP; OR, 1.1; 95% CI 0.84-1.4) or late secondary craniotomy/-ectomy (EP 2.5% vs. LP 2.9%; OR, 0.86; 95% CI 0.53-1.4) or intracranial monitoring/drainage (EP 1.1% vs. LP 1.4%; OR, 0.76; 95% CI 0.37-1.6) from VTE complications or other reasons.

“Practice guidelines say we should initiate VTE [venous thromboembolism] prophylaxis” in severe TBI “as early as possible. It’s a very loose recommendation,” so some centers wait 72 hours or longer for fear of extending intracranial hemorrhages. Pending results from prospective trials, “our study lends evidence that early prophylaxis in this population may be safe,” said investigator and University of Toronto general surgery resident, Dr. James Byrne.

The study included 3,634 severe, adult TBI patients in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database from 2012-2014. The subjects had head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) scores of at least 3, Glasgow Coma Scale scores of no more than 8, and, in almost all cases, initial surgeries within 48 hours. Injury was due to blunt trauma. Patients who died or were discharged within 5 days of their injury and those with severe injuries to other body areas were excluded from the analysis.

The median time to starting VTE prophylaxis was 84 hours across the 186 trauma centers in the study, but ranged from 48-150 hours. Centers started prophylaxis within 72 hours in 18%-54% of patients. Fifty-five percent of patients had prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin, and the rest with unfractionated heparin. Overall, 1.7% of patients developed pulmonary emboli, and 6.5% deep vein thromboses. Less than 3% had secondary neurosurgical interventions.

Prophylaxis was more likely to be delayed past 72 hours in patients with higher head AIS scores; subdural hematomas; subarachnoid hemorrhages; blood transfusions within 12 hours of admission; and early neurosurgery. Low-molecular-weight heparin was the more likely option past 72 hours.

Among the 114 centers who treated 10 or more patients, there was a continuous trend toward lower VTE rates with higher EP use, a rate of 9.1% in centers using EP in 18% of patients, but 6.1% in centers using it in 54% (P = .126).

The decision of when to start prophylaxis in severe TBI “still needs to be made at the patient level, but it may be safe to start earlier than 72 hours,” Dr. Byrne said.

The median age in the study was about 43 years, and three-quarters of the subjects were men. Most of the injuries were due to falls or motor vehicle crashes.

Dr. Byrne had no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

SAN ANTONIO – Initiation of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis within 72 hours of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) reduced the odds of venous thromboembolism by 50% without increasing subsequent intracranial complications or death in a large, propensity-matched cohort study from the University of Toronto.

The investigators matched 1,234 adult patients given prophylaxis before 72 hours – the early-prophylaxis (EP) group – to 1,234 given prophylaxis at 72 hours or later – the late-prophylaxis (LP) group – based on demographics, injury characteristics, intracranial lesions, early neurosurgical procedures, and prophylaxis type.

Dr. James Byrne

EP patients had a significantly lower rate of pulmonary embolism (1.1% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.91) and deep vein thrombosis (4.2% vs. 7.9%; OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.72), with no significant increase in the risk of death (9.8% EP vs. 9% LP; OR, 1.1; 95% CI 0.84-1.4) or late secondary craniotomy/-ectomy (EP 2.5% vs. LP 2.9%; OR, 0.86; 95% CI 0.53-1.4) or intracranial monitoring/drainage (EP 1.1% vs. LP 1.4%; OR, 0.76; 95% CI 0.37-1.6) from VTE complications or other reasons.

“Practice guidelines say we should initiate VTE [venous thromboembolism] prophylaxis” in severe TBI “as early as possible. It’s a very loose recommendation,” so some centers wait 72 hours or longer for fear of extending intracranial hemorrhages. Pending results from prospective trials, “our study lends evidence that early prophylaxis in this population may be safe,” said investigator and University of Toronto general surgery resident, Dr. James Byrne.

The study included 3,634 severe, adult TBI patients in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database from 2012-2014. The subjects had head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) scores of at least 3, Glasgow Coma Scale scores of no more than 8, and, in almost all cases, initial surgeries within 48 hours. Injury was due to blunt trauma. Patients who died or were discharged within 5 days of their injury and those with severe injuries to other body areas were excluded from the analysis.

The median time to starting VTE prophylaxis was 84 hours across the 186 trauma centers in the study, but ranged from 48-150 hours. Centers started prophylaxis within 72 hours in 18%-54% of patients. Fifty-five percent of patients had prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin, and the rest with unfractionated heparin. Overall, 1.7% of patients developed pulmonary emboli, and 6.5% deep vein thromboses. Less than 3% had secondary neurosurgical interventions.

Prophylaxis was more likely to be delayed past 72 hours in patients with higher head AIS scores; subdural hematomas; subarachnoid hemorrhages; blood transfusions within 12 hours of admission; and early neurosurgery. Low-molecular-weight heparin was the more likely option past 72 hours.

Among the 114 centers who treated 10 or more patients, there was a continuous trend toward lower VTE rates with higher EP use, a rate of 9.1% in centers using EP in 18% of patients, but 6.1% in centers using it in 54% (P = .126).

The decision of when to start prophylaxis in severe TBI “still needs to be made at the patient level, but it may be safe to start earlier than 72 hours,” Dr. Byrne said.

The median age in the study was about 43 years, and three-quarters of the subjects were men. Most of the injuries were due to falls or motor vehicle crashes.

Dr. Byrne had no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN ANTONIO – Initiation of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis within 72 hours of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) reduced the odds of venous thromboembolism by 50% without increasing subsequent intracranial complications or death in a large, propensity-matched cohort study from the University of Toronto.

The investigators matched 1,234 adult patients given prophylaxis before 72 hours – the early-prophylaxis (EP) group – to 1,234 given prophylaxis at 72 hours or later – the late-prophylaxis (LP) group – based on demographics, injury characteristics, intracranial lesions, early neurosurgical procedures, and prophylaxis type.

Dr. James Byrne

EP patients had a significantly lower rate of pulmonary embolism (1.1% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.91) and deep vein thrombosis (4.2% vs. 7.9%; OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.72), with no significant increase in the risk of death (9.8% EP vs. 9% LP; OR, 1.1; 95% CI 0.84-1.4) or late secondary craniotomy/-ectomy (EP 2.5% vs. LP 2.9%; OR, 0.86; 95% CI 0.53-1.4) or intracranial monitoring/drainage (EP 1.1% vs. LP 1.4%; OR, 0.76; 95% CI 0.37-1.6) from VTE complications or other reasons.

“Practice guidelines say we should initiate VTE [venous thromboembolism] prophylaxis” in severe TBI “as early as possible. It’s a very loose recommendation,” so some centers wait 72 hours or longer for fear of extending intracranial hemorrhages. Pending results from prospective trials, “our study lends evidence that early prophylaxis in this population may be safe,” said investigator and University of Toronto general surgery resident, Dr. James Byrne.

The study included 3,634 severe, adult TBI patients in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database from 2012-2014. The subjects had head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) scores of at least 3, Glasgow Coma Scale scores of no more than 8, and, in almost all cases, initial surgeries within 48 hours. Injury was due to blunt trauma. Patients who died or were discharged within 5 days of their injury and those with severe injuries to other body areas were excluded from the analysis.

The median time to starting VTE prophylaxis was 84 hours across the 186 trauma centers in the study, but ranged from 48-150 hours. Centers started prophylaxis within 72 hours in 18%-54% of patients. Fifty-five percent of patients had prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin, and the rest with unfractionated heparin. Overall, 1.7% of patients developed pulmonary emboli, and 6.5% deep vein thromboses. Less than 3% had secondary neurosurgical interventions.

Prophylaxis was more likely to be delayed past 72 hours in patients with higher head AIS scores; subdural hematomas; subarachnoid hemorrhages; blood transfusions within 12 hours of admission; and early neurosurgery. Low-molecular-weight heparin was the more likely option past 72 hours.

Among the 114 centers who treated 10 or more patients, there was a continuous trend toward lower VTE rates with higher EP use, a rate of 9.1% in centers using EP in 18% of patients, but 6.1% in centers using it in 54% (P = .126).

The decision of when to start prophylaxis in severe TBI “still needs to be made at the patient level, but it may be safe to start earlier than 72 hours,” Dr. Byrne said.

The median age in the study was about 43 years, and three-quarters of the subjects were men. Most of the injuries were due to falls or motor vehicle crashes.

Dr. Byrne had no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
VTE prophylaxis within 72 hours seems safe in severe TBI
Display Headline
VTE prophylaxis within 72 hours seems safe in severe TBI
Sections
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: VTE prophylaxis within 72 hours appears to be safe in patients with TBI.

Major finding: Patients who had prophylaxis within 72 hours had a significantly lower rate of pulmonary embolism, compared with those started later (1.1% vs. 2.4%); and deep vein thrombosis (4.2% vs. 7.9%).

Data source: More than 2,000 patients in a propensity-matched cohort study from the University of Toronto.

Disclosures: Dr. Byrne had no disclosures.

Surgeons dinged by incomplete risk adjustment for emergency cases

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 09:28
Display Headline
Surgeons dinged by incomplete risk adjustment for emergency cases

SAN ANTONIO – Perioperative risk factors affect postoperative morbidity and mortality differently in emergency and nonemergency surgery, according to an analysis of the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database by investigators from Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

“Instead of using the same risk-adjustment model for both ... as is currently being done, our findings strongly suggest the need to benchmark emergent and elective surgeries separately,” they concluded.

Dr. Jordan Bohnen

“Most risk-adjustment models simply have an on/off switch for whether or not the patient underwent emergency surgery and treat comorbidities and other perioperative variables the same.” Those variables, however, “don’t behave the same way in emergency surgery,” said investigator Dr. Jordan Bohnen, a surgical research resident at Mass General.

Because risk adjustment doesn’t take into account variables that have a particularly strong negative impact in emergency settings, acute care surgeons are getting “unnecessarily dinged for having higher complication rates,” he said at the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma scientific assembly.

For example, the team found that preop transfusions and white blood counts (WBC) at or below 4.5 carry a significantly higher risk of 30-day major morbidity or mortality (MMM) in emergency versus nonemergency surgery. Conversely, ascites, preop anemia, and leukocytosis carry a greater MMM risk in nonemergent cases.

The findings come from a comparison of 110,182 nonemergent surgeries to 59,949 emergency cases – generally meaning surgery within 12 hours of emergency department (ED) admission – from the NSQIP database for 2011-2012.

As expected, the overall risk of MMM was significantly higher for emergency cases (16.75% vs. 9.73%; P less than .001), and four procedures – laparoscopic cholecystectomy, exploratory laparotomy, and umbilical and incisional hernia repairs – were relatively riskier when done emergently.

“As surgical quality improvement efforts mature, it’s increasingly important to apply accurate risk-adjustment models to benchmark quality improvement for surgeons, hospitals, and health care systems.” The current “assumption that perioperative variables have an equal impact on outcomes in emergent and nonemergent settings” is incorrect. “Risk factors for bad outcomes change depending on the setting,” Dr. Bohnen said.

Dr. Bohnen has no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

SAN ANTONIO – Perioperative risk factors affect postoperative morbidity and mortality differently in emergency and nonemergency surgery, according to an analysis of the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database by investigators from Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

“Instead of using the same risk-adjustment model for both ... as is currently being done, our findings strongly suggest the need to benchmark emergent and elective surgeries separately,” they concluded.

Dr. Jordan Bohnen

“Most risk-adjustment models simply have an on/off switch for whether or not the patient underwent emergency surgery and treat comorbidities and other perioperative variables the same.” Those variables, however, “don’t behave the same way in emergency surgery,” said investigator Dr. Jordan Bohnen, a surgical research resident at Mass General.

Because risk adjustment doesn’t take into account variables that have a particularly strong negative impact in emergency settings, acute care surgeons are getting “unnecessarily dinged for having higher complication rates,” he said at the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma scientific assembly.

For example, the team found that preop transfusions and white blood counts (WBC) at or below 4.5 carry a significantly higher risk of 30-day major morbidity or mortality (MMM) in emergency versus nonemergency surgery. Conversely, ascites, preop anemia, and leukocytosis carry a greater MMM risk in nonemergent cases.

The findings come from a comparison of 110,182 nonemergent surgeries to 59,949 emergency cases – generally meaning surgery within 12 hours of emergency department (ED) admission – from the NSQIP database for 2011-2012.

As expected, the overall risk of MMM was significantly higher for emergency cases (16.75% vs. 9.73%; P less than .001), and four procedures – laparoscopic cholecystectomy, exploratory laparotomy, and umbilical and incisional hernia repairs – were relatively riskier when done emergently.

“As surgical quality improvement efforts mature, it’s increasingly important to apply accurate risk-adjustment models to benchmark quality improvement for surgeons, hospitals, and health care systems.” The current “assumption that perioperative variables have an equal impact on outcomes in emergent and nonemergent settings” is incorrect. “Risk factors for bad outcomes change depending on the setting,” Dr. Bohnen said.

Dr. Bohnen has no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN ANTONIO – Perioperative risk factors affect postoperative morbidity and mortality differently in emergency and nonemergency surgery, according to an analysis of the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database by investigators from Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

“Instead of using the same risk-adjustment model for both ... as is currently being done, our findings strongly suggest the need to benchmark emergent and elective surgeries separately,” they concluded.

Dr. Jordan Bohnen

“Most risk-adjustment models simply have an on/off switch for whether or not the patient underwent emergency surgery and treat comorbidities and other perioperative variables the same.” Those variables, however, “don’t behave the same way in emergency surgery,” said investigator Dr. Jordan Bohnen, a surgical research resident at Mass General.

Because risk adjustment doesn’t take into account variables that have a particularly strong negative impact in emergency settings, acute care surgeons are getting “unnecessarily dinged for having higher complication rates,” he said at the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma scientific assembly.

For example, the team found that preop transfusions and white blood counts (WBC) at or below 4.5 carry a significantly higher risk of 30-day major morbidity or mortality (MMM) in emergency versus nonemergency surgery. Conversely, ascites, preop anemia, and leukocytosis carry a greater MMM risk in nonemergent cases.

The findings come from a comparison of 110,182 nonemergent surgeries to 59,949 emergency cases – generally meaning surgery within 12 hours of emergency department (ED) admission – from the NSQIP database for 2011-2012.

As expected, the overall risk of MMM was significantly higher for emergency cases (16.75% vs. 9.73%; P less than .001), and four procedures – laparoscopic cholecystectomy, exploratory laparotomy, and umbilical and incisional hernia repairs – were relatively riskier when done emergently.

“As surgical quality improvement efforts mature, it’s increasingly important to apply accurate risk-adjustment models to benchmark quality improvement for surgeons, hospitals, and health care systems.” The current “assumption that perioperative variables have an equal impact on outcomes in emergent and nonemergent settings” is incorrect. “Risk factors for bad outcomes change depending on the setting,” Dr. Bohnen said.

Dr. Bohnen has no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Surgeons dinged by incomplete risk adjustment for emergency cases
Display Headline
Surgeons dinged by incomplete risk adjustment for emergency cases
Sections
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: Emergent and elective surgeries need to be benchmarked separately.

Major finding: Preop transfusions and WBC counts at or below 4.5 carry a significantly higher risk of 30-day major morbidity or mortality (MMM) in emergency surgery. Conversely, ascites, preop anemia, and leukocytosis carry a greater MMM risk in nonemergent cases.

Data source: More than 170,000 cases in the NSQIP database

Disclosures: The presenter has no disclosures.

Level 1 activation reduces LOS, mortality in geriatric trauma

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 09:28
Display Headline
Level 1 activation reduces LOS, mortality in geriatric trauma

SAN ANTONIO – Automatically bumping elderly Level 2 trauma patients to Level 1 status reduced mortality and emergency department lengths of stay at Indiana University Health Methodist Hospital, Indianapolis.

Like trauma services elsewhere, the Methodist team is trying to figure out how best to handle the coming increase in elderly patients as the Baby Boom generation ages. It’s known that older trauma patients tend to be undertriaged. To improve the situation, “we need to respond quickly with a lot of resources up front so we don’t delay diagnosis” and treatment, said investigator Dr. Peter Hammer, assistant professor of surgery at Indiana University, Indianapolis.

Dr. Peter Hammer

The solution Methodist has tried since October 2013 is a Level 1 response to any patient aged 70 years or older who meets Level 2 criteria, regardless of vital sign stability or injury mechanism. With Level 1, trauma attendings, residents, respiratory therapists, clinical pharmacists, and others are at the bedside within 15 minutes and CT services and operating rooms are on standby, among other measures. Compared with the 1,271 patients aged 70 years or older treated in the almost 2 years before the change, the 998 treated in the year and a half afterwards were, after controlling for age, comorbidities, and injury severity scores (ISS), more likely to leave the ED in less than 2 hours (odds ratio, 1.614; 95% confidence interval, 1.088-2.394) and less likely to die (OR, 0.689, 95% CI, 0.484-0.979).

The before and after groups were similar, with a mean age of 81 years, a mean ISS of 12.2, a high comorbidity burden, and, for most, a blunt injury: 8.3% died in the before group, versus 7.6% in the after group. The shorter ED stays occurred despite a nursing staff reduction in 2014. Patients who went into cardiac arrest before arrival or died in the ED were excluded from the analysis.

“A simple, focused intervention of a higher level of trauma activation can decrease ED length of stay and in-hospital mortality in elderly trauma patients,” Dr. Hammer said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Among many initiatives as many trauma centers gear up for aging baby boomers, others are trying age as a criteria for higher activation, too, and recent guidelines from EAST recommend a lower threshold for trauma activation for patients 65 years or older, among other steps.

With more expertise and resources to brought to bear, it’s not surprising that Level 1 patients left the ED sooner, but it’s unclear what role that played in reducing mortality. “I wouldn’t hazard [to say] that shorter lengths of stay necessarily” saved lives, Dr. Hammer said.

Before the intervention, just 4.8% of geriatric patients left the ED within 2 hours, versus 6.5% afterwards. The numbers are low because, “as in most hospitals, there are more trauma patients than beds. [Reducing ED] length or stay [remains] an ongoing project” at Methodist, and not just for the elderly. “The ED is always overcrowded come afternoon and into the evening,” Dr. Hammer said.

That’s one of the reasons management supported the project. “They like the concept of getting patients moved through quickly. We have a lot of resources in the ED, so there doesn’t seem to be much of a slowdown” with increased Level 1 activation. It probably costs more up front, “but the hope is we’ll save money on the back end with lower mortality and shorter ED stays,” he said.

The investigators had no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

SAN ANTONIO – Automatically bumping elderly Level 2 trauma patients to Level 1 status reduced mortality and emergency department lengths of stay at Indiana University Health Methodist Hospital, Indianapolis.

Like trauma services elsewhere, the Methodist team is trying to figure out how best to handle the coming increase in elderly patients as the Baby Boom generation ages. It’s known that older trauma patients tend to be undertriaged. To improve the situation, “we need to respond quickly with a lot of resources up front so we don’t delay diagnosis” and treatment, said investigator Dr. Peter Hammer, assistant professor of surgery at Indiana University, Indianapolis.

Dr. Peter Hammer

The solution Methodist has tried since October 2013 is a Level 1 response to any patient aged 70 years or older who meets Level 2 criteria, regardless of vital sign stability or injury mechanism. With Level 1, trauma attendings, residents, respiratory therapists, clinical pharmacists, and others are at the bedside within 15 minutes and CT services and operating rooms are on standby, among other measures. Compared with the 1,271 patients aged 70 years or older treated in the almost 2 years before the change, the 998 treated in the year and a half afterwards were, after controlling for age, comorbidities, and injury severity scores (ISS), more likely to leave the ED in less than 2 hours (odds ratio, 1.614; 95% confidence interval, 1.088-2.394) and less likely to die (OR, 0.689, 95% CI, 0.484-0.979).

The before and after groups were similar, with a mean age of 81 years, a mean ISS of 12.2, a high comorbidity burden, and, for most, a blunt injury: 8.3% died in the before group, versus 7.6% in the after group. The shorter ED stays occurred despite a nursing staff reduction in 2014. Patients who went into cardiac arrest before arrival or died in the ED were excluded from the analysis.

“A simple, focused intervention of a higher level of trauma activation can decrease ED length of stay and in-hospital mortality in elderly trauma patients,” Dr. Hammer said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Among many initiatives as many trauma centers gear up for aging baby boomers, others are trying age as a criteria for higher activation, too, and recent guidelines from EAST recommend a lower threshold for trauma activation for patients 65 years or older, among other steps.

With more expertise and resources to brought to bear, it’s not surprising that Level 1 patients left the ED sooner, but it’s unclear what role that played in reducing mortality. “I wouldn’t hazard [to say] that shorter lengths of stay necessarily” saved lives, Dr. Hammer said.

Before the intervention, just 4.8% of geriatric patients left the ED within 2 hours, versus 6.5% afterwards. The numbers are low because, “as in most hospitals, there are more trauma patients than beds. [Reducing ED] length or stay [remains] an ongoing project” at Methodist, and not just for the elderly. “The ED is always overcrowded come afternoon and into the evening,” Dr. Hammer said.

That’s one of the reasons management supported the project. “They like the concept of getting patients moved through quickly. We have a lot of resources in the ED, so there doesn’t seem to be much of a slowdown” with increased Level 1 activation. It probably costs more up front, “but the hope is we’ll save money on the back end with lower mortality and shorter ED stays,” he said.

The investigators had no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN ANTONIO – Automatically bumping elderly Level 2 trauma patients to Level 1 status reduced mortality and emergency department lengths of stay at Indiana University Health Methodist Hospital, Indianapolis.

Like trauma services elsewhere, the Methodist team is trying to figure out how best to handle the coming increase in elderly patients as the Baby Boom generation ages. It’s known that older trauma patients tend to be undertriaged. To improve the situation, “we need to respond quickly with a lot of resources up front so we don’t delay diagnosis” and treatment, said investigator Dr. Peter Hammer, assistant professor of surgery at Indiana University, Indianapolis.

Dr. Peter Hammer

The solution Methodist has tried since October 2013 is a Level 1 response to any patient aged 70 years or older who meets Level 2 criteria, regardless of vital sign stability or injury mechanism. With Level 1, trauma attendings, residents, respiratory therapists, clinical pharmacists, and others are at the bedside within 15 minutes and CT services and operating rooms are on standby, among other measures. Compared with the 1,271 patients aged 70 years or older treated in the almost 2 years before the change, the 998 treated in the year and a half afterwards were, after controlling for age, comorbidities, and injury severity scores (ISS), more likely to leave the ED in less than 2 hours (odds ratio, 1.614; 95% confidence interval, 1.088-2.394) and less likely to die (OR, 0.689, 95% CI, 0.484-0.979).

The before and after groups were similar, with a mean age of 81 years, a mean ISS of 12.2, a high comorbidity burden, and, for most, a blunt injury: 8.3% died in the before group, versus 7.6% in the after group. The shorter ED stays occurred despite a nursing staff reduction in 2014. Patients who went into cardiac arrest before arrival or died in the ED were excluded from the analysis.

“A simple, focused intervention of a higher level of trauma activation can decrease ED length of stay and in-hospital mortality in elderly trauma patients,” Dr. Hammer said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Among many initiatives as many trauma centers gear up for aging baby boomers, others are trying age as a criteria for higher activation, too, and recent guidelines from EAST recommend a lower threshold for trauma activation for patients 65 years or older, among other steps.

With more expertise and resources to brought to bear, it’s not surprising that Level 1 patients left the ED sooner, but it’s unclear what role that played in reducing mortality. “I wouldn’t hazard [to say] that shorter lengths of stay necessarily” saved lives, Dr. Hammer said.

Before the intervention, just 4.8% of geriatric patients left the ED within 2 hours, versus 6.5% afterwards. The numbers are low because, “as in most hospitals, there are more trauma patients than beds. [Reducing ED] length or stay [remains] an ongoing project” at Methodist, and not just for the elderly. “The ED is always overcrowded come afternoon and into the evening,” Dr. Hammer said.

That’s one of the reasons management supported the project. “They like the concept of getting patients moved through quickly. We have a lot of resources in the ED, so there doesn’t seem to be much of a slowdown” with increased Level 1 activation. It probably costs more up front, “but the hope is we’ll save money on the back end with lower mortality and shorter ED stays,” he said.

The investigators had no disclosures.

aotto@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Level 1 activation reduces LOS, mortality in geriatric trauma
Display Headline
Level 1 activation reduces LOS, mortality in geriatric trauma
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: Consider treating Level 2 elderly trauma patients at Level 1 status.

Major finding: The 998 Level 2 elderly trauma patients treated as Level 1, after controlling for age, comorbidities, and injury severity scores, were more likely to leave the ED in less than 2 hours and were less likely to die, compared with patients treated in the previous 2 years.

Data source: More than 2,000 trauma patients aged 70 years or older.

Disclosures: The investigators had no disclosures.

Private-academic surgeon salary gap raises concerns Lifestyle choice important Not just the money

Personal and lifestyle choice important
Article Type
Changed
Tue, 12/13/2016 - 12:08
Display Headline
Private-academic surgeon salary gap raises concerns Lifestyle choice important Not just the money
Would you pick academia if you stood to lose $1.3 million over your career?

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Academic surgeons earn an average of 10% or $1.3 million less in gross income across their lifetime than surgeons in private practice, an analysis shows.

Some surgical specialties fare better than others, with academic neurosurgeons having the largest reduction in gross income at $4.2 million (–24.2%), while academic pediatric surgeons earn $238,376 more (1.53%) than their private practice counterparts. They were the only ones to do so.

Several academic surgical specialties did not make the 10% average, including trauma surgeons whose lifetime earnings were down 12% or $2.4 million, vascular surgeons at 13.8% or $1.7 million, and surgical oncologists at 12.2% or $1.3 million.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical Group
Dr. Joseph Martin Lopez

“The concern that we have is that the academic surgeons are where the education of the future lies,” lead study author Dr. Joseph Martin Lopez said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST).

Every year a new class of surgeons is faced with the question of academic practice or private practice, but they are also struggling with increasing student loan debt and longer training as more surgical residents elect to enter fellowship rather than general practice.

This growing financial liability coupled with declining physician reimbursement could rapidly shift physician practices and thus threaten the fiscal viability of certain surgical fields or academic surgical careers.

“The more financially irresponsible you make it to become an academic surgeon, the more we put at risk our current mode of training,” Dr. Lopez of Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C., said.

To account for additional factors outside gross income, the investigators ran the numbers using a second analysis, a net present value calculation, however, and came up with roughly the same salary gap to contend with.

Net present value (NPV) calculations are commonly used in business to calculate the profitability of an investment and also have been used in the medical field to gauge return on investment for various careers. The NPV calculation accounts for positive and negative cash flows over the entire length of a career, using in this case, a 5% discount rate and adjusting for inflation, Dr. Lopez explained.

Both the lifetime gross income and 5% NPV calculation used data from the Medical Group Management Association’s 2012 physician salary report, the 2012 Association of American Medical Colleges physician salary report, and the AAMC database for residency and fellow salary.

The NPV assumed a career length of 37-39 years, based on a retirement age of 65 years for all specialties. Positive cash flows included annual salary less federal income tax. Negative cash flows included the average principal for student loans, according to the AAMC, and interest at 5%, the average for the three largest student loan lenders in 2014, he said. Student loan repayment was calculated for a fixed-rate loan to be paid over 25 years beginning after residency or any required fellowship.

The average reduction in 5% NPV across surgical specialties for an academic surgeon versus a privately employed surgeon was 12.8% or $246,499, Dr. Lopez said.

Once again, academic neurosurgeons had the largest reduction in 5% NPV at 25.5% or a loss of $619,681, followed closely by trauma surgeons (23% or $381,179) and surgical oncologists (16.3% or $256,373). Academic pediatric surgeons had the smallest reduction in 5% NPV at 4.2% or $88,827.

During a discussion of the provocative poster, attendees questioned whether it was fair to say that private surgeons make more money without acknowledging the risk they face, compared with surgeons employed in an academic setting.

Dr. Lopez countered that, increasingly, even private surgeons are no longer truly private surgeons.

“More and more surgical groups are being bought up by hospitals, and even the private surgical groups are being bought up by hospitals, which does stabilize your income to some extent,” he said.

“We all still have [relative value unit] goals to meet and RVU incentives that make it so you can get paid a little more, but it’s something that’s a consideration. It is a risk-reward to be a private surgeon. Depending on how your contract is structured or how your group decides to pay the partners, it may be that if you don’t take very much call or take that many cases, you’ll end up on the short end of the stick.”

Dr. Ben L. Zarzaur

Dr. Ben L. Zarzaur, a general surgeon at Indiana University in Indianapolis who comoderated the poster discussion, pointed out that market pressures unaccounted for in the model can dramatically influence a surgeon’s salary over a lifetime.

 

 

Dr. Lopez agreed, citing how the increasing number of stent placements by cardiologists, for example, has impacted the bottom line of cardiothoracic surgeons. The NPV calculation was specifically used, however, because it gets at market forces such as inflation and return on investment, not addressed by gross income figures alone.

Finally, Dr. Zarzaur turned and asked the relatively young crowd what they would do if offered $600,000 a year, but had to work 110 hours a week or could get $250,000 and work only 40 hours a week.

Most responded that they’d choose the former to repay their student loans and then switch to the lower-paying position.

Responders made much of job satisfaction, work-life balance, and the ability of surgeons in academic practice to take time away from clinical work to conduct research, their ready access to continuing medical education, and their ability to educate the next generation of surgeons.

“Any time we see this academic-private disparity, you have to think about these secondary gains,” Dr. Zarzaur said.

“This is really interesting work. It gets into why we choose what we do, why we’d take $600,000, work 110 hours a week, and get our rear ends kicked. The flip side is, if I saw this, why would you ever go into academics? But people still choose to do it. I’m in academics so there’s a bias, but we choose to do it anyway up to a point. I don’t know where that point is, but up to a point we do.”

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Body

Not just the money

Dr. Laura Drudi

In the United States, academic vascular surgeons earn 13.8% or $1.7 million less than private vascular surgeons. This financial incentive may influence graduating residents and fellows to enter into private practice. This article indicates that this financial disparity may cost academic institutions the expertise needed to train future physicians. Unfortunately, I believe this analysis falls into one of the many myths between academic and private practice; that is, it’s not only about making the most money possible.

The ongoing debate of academic versus private practice shouldn’t really be a debate at all. It is all about personal choices concerning research, education, work-life balance, and finances to name a few. In the end, anyone can shape the ideal practice they want to have. There are many private practices that are involved in resident education, publish extensively and present at national and international meetings. No job is weaved perfectly, but there will usually be a job that fits an individual’s specific goals and desires.

Dr. Laura Drudi is the resident medical editor for Vascular Specialist.

Lifestyle choice important

The basic finding of the disparity is in fact true leaving aside the flawed methodology of too many assumptions by including all academic ranks, practitioners of different durations in practice, difference in benefits, tuition assistance, and assuming student loans for all surgeons plus a risk free rate that is too high.

Our analysis of both vascular and general surgeon compensation points to a larger disparity at junior academic ranks over the last decade. With our own studies showing a shortage of vascular surgeons, retention of practitioners is paramount for all health systems. Academic centers rely on faculty giving up a percentage of their compensation for the pleasure of teaching, research and intellectual stimulation. The unanswered question is: How much of a disparity will junior academic surgeons tolerate, and how do they value lifestyle against additional compensation? Time will tell.

Dr. Bhagwan Satiani is a professor of vascular surgery at the Wexner Medical Center, Ohio State University.

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Legacy Keywords
academic surgeon, private practice surgeon, salary disparity, physician salary, EAST
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event
Would you pick academia if you stood to lose $1.3 million over your career?
Would you pick academia if you stood to lose $1.3 million over your career?
Body

Not just the money

Dr. Laura Drudi

In the United States, academic vascular surgeons earn 13.8% or $1.7 million less than private vascular surgeons. This financial incentive may influence graduating residents and fellows to enter into private practice. This article indicates that this financial disparity may cost academic institutions the expertise needed to train future physicians. Unfortunately, I believe this analysis falls into one of the many myths between academic and private practice; that is, it’s not only about making the most money possible.

The ongoing debate of academic versus private practice shouldn’t really be a debate at all. It is all about personal choices concerning research, education, work-life balance, and finances to name a few. In the end, anyone can shape the ideal practice they want to have. There are many private practices that are involved in resident education, publish extensively and present at national and international meetings. No job is weaved perfectly, but there will usually be a job that fits an individual’s specific goals and desires.

Dr. Laura Drudi is the resident medical editor for Vascular Specialist.

Lifestyle choice important

The basic finding of the disparity is in fact true leaving aside the flawed methodology of too many assumptions by including all academic ranks, practitioners of different durations in practice, difference in benefits, tuition assistance, and assuming student loans for all surgeons plus a risk free rate that is too high.

Our analysis of both vascular and general surgeon compensation points to a larger disparity at junior academic ranks over the last decade. With our own studies showing a shortage of vascular surgeons, retention of practitioners is paramount for all health systems. Academic centers rely on faculty giving up a percentage of their compensation for the pleasure of teaching, research and intellectual stimulation. The unanswered question is: How much of a disparity will junior academic surgeons tolerate, and how do they value lifestyle against additional compensation? Time will tell.

Dr. Bhagwan Satiani is a professor of vascular surgery at the Wexner Medical Center, Ohio State University.

Body

Not just the money

Dr. Laura Drudi

In the United States, academic vascular surgeons earn 13.8% or $1.7 million less than private vascular surgeons. This financial incentive may influence graduating residents and fellows to enter into private practice. This article indicates that this financial disparity may cost academic institutions the expertise needed to train future physicians. Unfortunately, I believe this analysis falls into one of the many myths between academic and private practice; that is, it’s not only about making the most money possible.

The ongoing debate of academic versus private practice shouldn’t really be a debate at all. It is all about personal choices concerning research, education, work-life balance, and finances to name a few. In the end, anyone can shape the ideal practice they want to have. There are many private practices that are involved in resident education, publish extensively and present at national and international meetings. No job is weaved perfectly, but there will usually be a job that fits an individual’s specific goals and desires.

Dr. Laura Drudi is the resident medical editor for Vascular Specialist.

Lifestyle choice important

The basic finding of the disparity is in fact true leaving aside the flawed methodology of too many assumptions by including all academic ranks, practitioners of different durations in practice, difference in benefits, tuition assistance, and assuming student loans for all surgeons plus a risk free rate that is too high.

Our analysis of both vascular and general surgeon compensation points to a larger disparity at junior academic ranks over the last decade. With our own studies showing a shortage of vascular surgeons, retention of practitioners is paramount for all health systems. Academic centers rely on faculty giving up a percentage of their compensation for the pleasure of teaching, research and intellectual stimulation. The unanswered question is: How much of a disparity will junior academic surgeons tolerate, and how do they value lifestyle against additional compensation? Time will tell.

Dr. Bhagwan Satiani is a professor of vascular surgery at the Wexner Medical Center, Ohio State University.

Title
Personal and lifestyle choice important
Personal and lifestyle choice important

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Academic surgeons earn an average of 10% or $1.3 million less in gross income across their lifetime than surgeons in private practice, an analysis shows.

Some surgical specialties fare better than others, with academic neurosurgeons having the largest reduction in gross income at $4.2 million (–24.2%), while academic pediatric surgeons earn $238,376 more (1.53%) than their private practice counterparts. They were the only ones to do so.

Several academic surgical specialties did not make the 10% average, including trauma surgeons whose lifetime earnings were down 12% or $2.4 million, vascular surgeons at 13.8% or $1.7 million, and surgical oncologists at 12.2% or $1.3 million.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical Group
Dr. Joseph Martin Lopez

“The concern that we have is that the academic surgeons are where the education of the future lies,” lead study author Dr. Joseph Martin Lopez said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST).

Every year a new class of surgeons is faced with the question of academic practice or private practice, but they are also struggling with increasing student loan debt and longer training as more surgical residents elect to enter fellowship rather than general practice.

This growing financial liability coupled with declining physician reimbursement could rapidly shift physician practices and thus threaten the fiscal viability of certain surgical fields or academic surgical careers.

“The more financially irresponsible you make it to become an academic surgeon, the more we put at risk our current mode of training,” Dr. Lopez of Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C., said.

To account for additional factors outside gross income, the investigators ran the numbers using a second analysis, a net present value calculation, however, and came up with roughly the same salary gap to contend with.

Net present value (NPV) calculations are commonly used in business to calculate the profitability of an investment and also have been used in the medical field to gauge return on investment for various careers. The NPV calculation accounts for positive and negative cash flows over the entire length of a career, using in this case, a 5% discount rate and adjusting for inflation, Dr. Lopez explained.

Both the lifetime gross income and 5% NPV calculation used data from the Medical Group Management Association’s 2012 physician salary report, the 2012 Association of American Medical Colleges physician salary report, and the AAMC database for residency and fellow salary.

The NPV assumed a career length of 37-39 years, based on a retirement age of 65 years for all specialties. Positive cash flows included annual salary less federal income tax. Negative cash flows included the average principal for student loans, according to the AAMC, and interest at 5%, the average for the three largest student loan lenders in 2014, he said. Student loan repayment was calculated for a fixed-rate loan to be paid over 25 years beginning after residency or any required fellowship.

The average reduction in 5% NPV across surgical specialties for an academic surgeon versus a privately employed surgeon was 12.8% or $246,499, Dr. Lopez said.

Once again, academic neurosurgeons had the largest reduction in 5% NPV at 25.5% or a loss of $619,681, followed closely by trauma surgeons (23% or $381,179) and surgical oncologists (16.3% or $256,373). Academic pediatric surgeons had the smallest reduction in 5% NPV at 4.2% or $88,827.

During a discussion of the provocative poster, attendees questioned whether it was fair to say that private surgeons make more money without acknowledging the risk they face, compared with surgeons employed in an academic setting.

Dr. Lopez countered that, increasingly, even private surgeons are no longer truly private surgeons.

“More and more surgical groups are being bought up by hospitals, and even the private surgical groups are being bought up by hospitals, which does stabilize your income to some extent,” he said.

“We all still have [relative value unit] goals to meet and RVU incentives that make it so you can get paid a little more, but it’s something that’s a consideration. It is a risk-reward to be a private surgeon. Depending on how your contract is structured or how your group decides to pay the partners, it may be that if you don’t take very much call or take that many cases, you’ll end up on the short end of the stick.”

Dr. Ben L. Zarzaur

Dr. Ben L. Zarzaur, a general surgeon at Indiana University in Indianapolis who comoderated the poster discussion, pointed out that market pressures unaccounted for in the model can dramatically influence a surgeon’s salary over a lifetime.

 

 

Dr. Lopez agreed, citing how the increasing number of stent placements by cardiologists, for example, has impacted the bottom line of cardiothoracic surgeons. The NPV calculation was specifically used, however, because it gets at market forces such as inflation and return on investment, not addressed by gross income figures alone.

Finally, Dr. Zarzaur turned and asked the relatively young crowd what they would do if offered $600,000 a year, but had to work 110 hours a week or could get $250,000 and work only 40 hours a week.

Most responded that they’d choose the former to repay their student loans and then switch to the lower-paying position.

Responders made much of job satisfaction, work-life balance, and the ability of surgeons in academic practice to take time away from clinical work to conduct research, their ready access to continuing medical education, and their ability to educate the next generation of surgeons.

“Any time we see this academic-private disparity, you have to think about these secondary gains,” Dr. Zarzaur said.

“This is really interesting work. It gets into why we choose what we do, why we’d take $600,000, work 110 hours a week, and get our rear ends kicked. The flip side is, if I saw this, why would you ever go into academics? But people still choose to do it. I’m in academics so there’s a bias, but we choose to do it anyway up to a point. I don’t know where that point is, but up to a point we do.”

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Academic surgeons earn an average of 10% or $1.3 million less in gross income across their lifetime than surgeons in private practice, an analysis shows.

Some surgical specialties fare better than others, with academic neurosurgeons having the largest reduction in gross income at $4.2 million (–24.2%), while academic pediatric surgeons earn $238,376 more (1.53%) than their private practice counterparts. They were the only ones to do so.

Several academic surgical specialties did not make the 10% average, including trauma surgeons whose lifetime earnings were down 12% or $2.4 million, vascular surgeons at 13.8% or $1.7 million, and surgical oncologists at 12.2% or $1.3 million.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical Group
Dr. Joseph Martin Lopez

“The concern that we have is that the academic surgeons are where the education of the future lies,” lead study author Dr. Joseph Martin Lopez said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST).

Every year a new class of surgeons is faced with the question of academic practice or private practice, but they are also struggling with increasing student loan debt and longer training as more surgical residents elect to enter fellowship rather than general practice.

This growing financial liability coupled with declining physician reimbursement could rapidly shift physician practices and thus threaten the fiscal viability of certain surgical fields or academic surgical careers.

“The more financially irresponsible you make it to become an academic surgeon, the more we put at risk our current mode of training,” Dr. Lopez of Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C., said.

To account for additional factors outside gross income, the investigators ran the numbers using a second analysis, a net present value calculation, however, and came up with roughly the same salary gap to contend with.

Net present value (NPV) calculations are commonly used in business to calculate the profitability of an investment and also have been used in the medical field to gauge return on investment for various careers. The NPV calculation accounts for positive and negative cash flows over the entire length of a career, using in this case, a 5% discount rate and adjusting for inflation, Dr. Lopez explained.

Both the lifetime gross income and 5% NPV calculation used data from the Medical Group Management Association’s 2012 physician salary report, the 2012 Association of American Medical Colleges physician salary report, and the AAMC database for residency and fellow salary.

The NPV assumed a career length of 37-39 years, based on a retirement age of 65 years for all specialties. Positive cash flows included annual salary less federal income tax. Negative cash flows included the average principal for student loans, according to the AAMC, and interest at 5%, the average for the three largest student loan lenders in 2014, he said. Student loan repayment was calculated for a fixed-rate loan to be paid over 25 years beginning after residency or any required fellowship.

The average reduction in 5% NPV across surgical specialties for an academic surgeon versus a privately employed surgeon was 12.8% or $246,499, Dr. Lopez said.

Once again, academic neurosurgeons had the largest reduction in 5% NPV at 25.5% or a loss of $619,681, followed closely by trauma surgeons (23% or $381,179) and surgical oncologists (16.3% or $256,373). Academic pediatric surgeons had the smallest reduction in 5% NPV at 4.2% or $88,827.

During a discussion of the provocative poster, attendees questioned whether it was fair to say that private surgeons make more money without acknowledging the risk they face, compared with surgeons employed in an academic setting.

Dr. Lopez countered that, increasingly, even private surgeons are no longer truly private surgeons.

“More and more surgical groups are being bought up by hospitals, and even the private surgical groups are being bought up by hospitals, which does stabilize your income to some extent,” he said.

“We all still have [relative value unit] goals to meet and RVU incentives that make it so you can get paid a little more, but it’s something that’s a consideration. It is a risk-reward to be a private surgeon. Depending on how your contract is structured or how your group decides to pay the partners, it may be that if you don’t take very much call or take that many cases, you’ll end up on the short end of the stick.”

Dr. Ben L. Zarzaur

Dr. Ben L. Zarzaur, a general surgeon at Indiana University in Indianapolis who comoderated the poster discussion, pointed out that market pressures unaccounted for in the model can dramatically influence a surgeon’s salary over a lifetime.

 

 

Dr. Lopez agreed, citing how the increasing number of stent placements by cardiologists, for example, has impacted the bottom line of cardiothoracic surgeons. The NPV calculation was specifically used, however, because it gets at market forces such as inflation and return on investment, not addressed by gross income figures alone.

Finally, Dr. Zarzaur turned and asked the relatively young crowd what they would do if offered $600,000 a year, but had to work 110 hours a week or could get $250,000 and work only 40 hours a week.

Most responded that they’d choose the former to repay their student loans and then switch to the lower-paying position.

Responders made much of job satisfaction, work-life balance, and the ability of surgeons in academic practice to take time away from clinical work to conduct research, their ready access to continuing medical education, and their ability to educate the next generation of surgeons.

“Any time we see this academic-private disparity, you have to think about these secondary gains,” Dr. Zarzaur said.

“This is really interesting work. It gets into why we choose what we do, why we’d take $600,000, work 110 hours a week, and get our rear ends kicked. The flip side is, if I saw this, why would you ever go into academics? But people still choose to do it. I’m in academics so there’s a bias, but we choose to do it anyway up to a point. I don’t know where that point is, but up to a point we do.”

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
Private-academic surgeon salary gap raises concerns Lifestyle choice important Not just the money
Display Headline
Private-academic surgeon salary gap raises concerns Lifestyle choice important Not just the money
Legacy Keywords
academic surgeon, private practice surgeon, salary disparity, physician salary, EAST
Legacy Keywords
academic surgeon, private practice surgeon, salary disparity, physician salary, EAST
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

mSTEADI: Better discharge-to-home rates in elderly fall patients

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 14:33
Display Headline
mSTEADI: Better discharge-to-home rates in elderly fall patients

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Modifying the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s outpatient fall prevention program STEADI for inpatient use did not prevent further falls in elderly patients hospitalized for fall injuries.

The intervention was associated, however, with a “clear reduction in median length of stay and hospital charges,” Dr. Alexander Eastman, M.P.H., said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Dr. Alexander Eastman

STEADI(Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths and Injuries) is a CDC–funded program. It has six core domains – fall history, medical conditions, medications, gait/balance, vision limitation, and postural hypotension – and includes standardized gait and balance assessments and a fall-prevention checklist.

Dr. Eastman and other members of a multidisciplinary team at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas used the same checklist principle to create a modified version of the STEADI program (mSTEADI) for inpatient use. Their patient assessment was associated with delivery of therapeutic interventions, and the gait and posture testing and therapies were adapted for use with injured patients.

Data were then prospectively collected for 1 year from 218 patients, aged older than 65 years, who were admitted for falls at the level 1 trauma center and enrolled in the mSTEADI program. Their results were compared with data from 196 historical controls from the same period the year before mSTEADI was introduced. The two groups were well matched with respect to median age (77 years vs. 76 years); mean Injury Severity Score (12.1 vs. 11.8); and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) head, face, chest, or abdomen scores. mSTEADI patients had a slightly higher mean AIS extremity score (2.7 vs. 2.5; P value = .014).

After a year, however, the mSTEADI group and the historical controls had the same in-house fall rate, 4.1%. The fall recidivism rate was 2.1% for the mSTEADI group and 2.8% for the controls, an insignificant difference, Dr. Eastman said.

The mSTEADI group, however, was discharged a day earlier (5 days vs. 6 days; P <.01), was more likely to be discharged directly home (54.5% vs. 46.8%; P <.01), and had lower overall hospital charges ($45,538 vs. $60,585; P = .02).

Dr. Stephanie Bonne

Limitations of the study were the use of retrospective controls and the very real possibility of selection bias in a group receiving intensive assessment and therapy, Dr. Eastman said. Discussant Dr. Stephanie Bonne of Washington University, St. Louis, asked whether the researchers were confident they captured all subsequent falls when calculating recidivism in such a large urban setting and whether the findings of shorter hospital stay and more discharges home would prompt them to recommend mSTEADI for enhancing rehabilitation protocols rather than for preventing repeated falls.

Dr. Eastman said that the combination of medical and emergency medical services records probably captured geriatric patients returning to the hospital with an injury from a fall since Southwestern is the EMS medical director for Dallas and 15 surrounding municipalities.

“As far as the decreased length of stay, I think there’s no question that increased focus on your rehabilitation efforts results in this unintended benefit of getting more patients home,” he added. “That’s a very real, tangible benefit to this program, but I’m not sure you have to incorporate all the other stuff that the mSTEADI program brings rather than breaking out just those specific portions of the program that are rehab focused and then really going out and studying in-hospital falls and fall recidivists to see what other phases are potential targets for intervention.”

Because the translation of the STEADI program to mSTEADI may have missed “some intangible associated with in-house falls,” an additional study of inpatient falls (iSTEADI) is being planned, as are home visits by Dallas paramedics to assess fall risk for every fall patient discharged from their institution, Dr. Eastman said.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
geriatric fall prevention, STEADI, UT Southwestern, trauma, inpatient falls
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Modifying the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s outpatient fall prevention program STEADI for inpatient use did not prevent further falls in elderly patients hospitalized for fall injuries.

The intervention was associated, however, with a “clear reduction in median length of stay and hospital charges,” Dr. Alexander Eastman, M.P.H., said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Dr. Alexander Eastman

STEADI(Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths and Injuries) is a CDC–funded program. It has six core domains – fall history, medical conditions, medications, gait/balance, vision limitation, and postural hypotension – and includes standardized gait and balance assessments and a fall-prevention checklist.

Dr. Eastman and other members of a multidisciplinary team at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas used the same checklist principle to create a modified version of the STEADI program (mSTEADI) for inpatient use. Their patient assessment was associated with delivery of therapeutic interventions, and the gait and posture testing and therapies were adapted for use with injured patients.

Data were then prospectively collected for 1 year from 218 patients, aged older than 65 years, who were admitted for falls at the level 1 trauma center and enrolled in the mSTEADI program. Their results were compared with data from 196 historical controls from the same period the year before mSTEADI was introduced. The two groups were well matched with respect to median age (77 years vs. 76 years); mean Injury Severity Score (12.1 vs. 11.8); and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) head, face, chest, or abdomen scores. mSTEADI patients had a slightly higher mean AIS extremity score (2.7 vs. 2.5; P value = .014).

After a year, however, the mSTEADI group and the historical controls had the same in-house fall rate, 4.1%. The fall recidivism rate was 2.1% for the mSTEADI group and 2.8% for the controls, an insignificant difference, Dr. Eastman said.

The mSTEADI group, however, was discharged a day earlier (5 days vs. 6 days; P <.01), was more likely to be discharged directly home (54.5% vs. 46.8%; P <.01), and had lower overall hospital charges ($45,538 vs. $60,585; P = .02).

Dr. Stephanie Bonne

Limitations of the study were the use of retrospective controls and the very real possibility of selection bias in a group receiving intensive assessment and therapy, Dr. Eastman said. Discussant Dr. Stephanie Bonne of Washington University, St. Louis, asked whether the researchers were confident they captured all subsequent falls when calculating recidivism in such a large urban setting and whether the findings of shorter hospital stay and more discharges home would prompt them to recommend mSTEADI for enhancing rehabilitation protocols rather than for preventing repeated falls.

Dr. Eastman said that the combination of medical and emergency medical services records probably captured geriatric patients returning to the hospital with an injury from a fall since Southwestern is the EMS medical director for Dallas and 15 surrounding municipalities.

“As far as the decreased length of stay, I think there’s no question that increased focus on your rehabilitation efforts results in this unintended benefit of getting more patients home,” he added. “That’s a very real, tangible benefit to this program, but I’m not sure you have to incorporate all the other stuff that the mSTEADI program brings rather than breaking out just those specific portions of the program that are rehab focused and then really going out and studying in-hospital falls and fall recidivists to see what other phases are potential targets for intervention.”

Because the translation of the STEADI program to mSTEADI may have missed “some intangible associated with in-house falls,” an additional study of inpatient falls (iSTEADI) is being planned, as are home visits by Dallas paramedics to assess fall risk for every fall patient discharged from their institution, Dr. Eastman said.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Modifying the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s outpatient fall prevention program STEADI for inpatient use did not prevent further falls in elderly patients hospitalized for fall injuries.

The intervention was associated, however, with a “clear reduction in median length of stay and hospital charges,” Dr. Alexander Eastman, M.P.H., said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Dr. Alexander Eastman

STEADI(Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths and Injuries) is a CDC–funded program. It has six core domains – fall history, medical conditions, medications, gait/balance, vision limitation, and postural hypotension – and includes standardized gait and balance assessments and a fall-prevention checklist.

Dr. Eastman and other members of a multidisciplinary team at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas used the same checklist principle to create a modified version of the STEADI program (mSTEADI) for inpatient use. Their patient assessment was associated with delivery of therapeutic interventions, and the gait and posture testing and therapies were adapted for use with injured patients.

Data were then prospectively collected for 1 year from 218 patients, aged older than 65 years, who were admitted for falls at the level 1 trauma center and enrolled in the mSTEADI program. Their results were compared with data from 196 historical controls from the same period the year before mSTEADI was introduced. The two groups were well matched with respect to median age (77 years vs. 76 years); mean Injury Severity Score (12.1 vs. 11.8); and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) head, face, chest, or abdomen scores. mSTEADI patients had a slightly higher mean AIS extremity score (2.7 vs. 2.5; P value = .014).

After a year, however, the mSTEADI group and the historical controls had the same in-house fall rate, 4.1%. The fall recidivism rate was 2.1% for the mSTEADI group and 2.8% for the controls, an insignificant difference, Dr. Eastman said.

The mSTEADI group, however, was discharged a day earlier (5 days vs. 6 days; P <.01), was more likely to be discharged directly home (54.5% vs. 46.8%; P <.01), and had lower overall hospital charges ($45,538 vs. $60,585; P = .02).

Dr. Stephanie Bonne

Limitations of the study were the use of retrospective controls and the very real possibility of selection bias in a group receiving intensive assessment and therapy, Dr. Eastman said. Discussant Dr. Stephanie Bonne of Washington University, St. Louis, asked whether the researchers were confident they captured all subsequent falls when calculating recidivism in such a large urban setting and whether the findings of shorter hospital stay and more discharges home would prompt them to recommend mSTEADI for enhancing rehabilitation protocols rather than for preventing repeated falls.

Dr. Eastman said that the combination of medical and emergency medical services records probably captured geriatric patients returning to the hospital with an injury from a fall since Southwestern is the EMS medical director for Dallas and 15 surrounding municipalities.

“As far as the decreased length of stay, I think there’s no question that increased focus on your rehabilitation efforts results in this unintended benefit of getting more patients home,” he added. “That’s a very real, tangible benefit to this program, but I’m not sure you have to incorporate all the other stuff that the mSTEADI program brings rather than breaking out just those specific portions of the program that are rehab focused and then really going out and studying in-hospital falls and fall recidivists to see what other phases are potential targets for intervention.”

Because the translation of the STEADI program to mSTEADI may have missed “some intangible associated with in-house falls,” an additional study of inpatient falls (iSTEADI) is being planned, as are home visits by Dallas paramedics to assess fall risk for every fall patient discharged from their institution, Dr. Eastman said.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
mSTEADI: Better discharge-to-home rates in elderly fall patients
Display Headline
mSTEADI: Better discharge-to-home rates in elderly fall patients
Legacy Keywords
geriatric fall prevention, STEADI, UT Southwestern, trauma, inpatient falls
Legacy Keywords
geriatric fall prevention, STEADI, UT Southwestern, trauma, inpatient falls
Sections
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: A fall-prevention program did not prevent in-hospital falls or fall recidivism, but it was associated with lower inpatient costs, earlier discharge, and a higher likelihood of discharge to home.

Major finding: Compared with historical controls, the mSTEADI group was discharged a day earlier (5 days vs. 6 days; P <.01), was more likely to be discharged directly home (54.5% vs. 46.8%; P <.01), and had lower overall hospital charges ($45,538 vs. $60,585; P = .02).

Data source: Prospective analysis of 218 elderly fall patients and 196 historical controls.

Disclosures: Dr. Eastman and Dr. Bonne reported having no financial disclosures.

Algorithm may predict intracranial pressure swings after TBI

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/07/2019 - 12:12
Display Headline
Algorithm may predict intracranial pressure swings after TBI

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – An algorithm might predict whether patients with severe traumatic brain injury are recovering well or need interventions to preempt evolving intracranial hypertension.

“Valid predictive algorithms have the potential to revolutionize the care of patients with traumatic brain injury [TBI] and transform physiologic data from just a pure numeric value buried in a never-ending nursing flow sheet into a useful triage and decision-assist tool,” study author Dr. Brandon Bonds said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Brandon Bonds

A minimum of 10 hours of continuous data on vital signs (intracranial pressure, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, shock index, and mean arterial pressure) were used to predict intracranial pressure (ICP) values for a retrospective cohort of 132 adults with severe TBI, 97% of which was the result of blunt trauma. Even relatively brief episodes of elevated ICP have been shown to be associated with poor outcomes in TBI patients, while marked elevation of ICP may lead to herniation and death, said Dr. Bonds of the R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland, Baltimore.

At the trauma center, vital signs are automatically collected every 6 seconds, 24 hours a day, on all TBI patients. This granularity of data was used to map patterns in the patients’ physiology. The approach used a nearest neighbor regression (NNR) method: A model was constructed that predicts future numerical values for an individual based on comparisons to data from historical subjects.

The same mathematical principal is used by a variety of industries to predict likely responses. NetFlix, for example, uses a system similar to the NNR method to predict future television and movie picks based on prior selections, Dr. Bonds explained.

About 20 minutes of continuously collected, automated vital sign data were then used to test the algorithm on a per-patient basis. The algorithm was used to predict future ICP values at 5 minutes to 2 hours from that time. The predictions are made on a rolling basis, with patient data updates every 5 minutes.

The NNR model was good at predicting actual ICP at 5 minutes, with a bias of 0.02 (± 2 standard deviations of 4 mm Hg). As expected, agreement was somewhat lessened at 2 hours (± 2 standard deviations of 10 mm Hg), “but this may still represent a clinically significant value,” Dr. Bonds said.

The next step is a prospective study of the algorithm’s utility.

Dr. Bonds said that NNR research really isn’t all that alien to medicine. Think about the experienced emergency physician who can look out into the wait room and “tell the nurse to bring back [a certain patient] because he didn’t look good,” Dr. Bonds said. Such a physician uses “the minimum amount of data he has and compares that patient to the historic data set of the thousands of patients that he’s seen previously to identify a patient that’s not going to do well. What we’re trying to do with this model is take this subjective skill and turn it into an objective tool.”

In an interview, session comoderator Dr. David A. Hampton, M.Eng., of Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, commented that he could definitely see the NNR method eventually having utility in severe TBI.

Future work will need to address outliers in the data because the standard deviation of 4 mm Hg “is pretty big for ICP swings” and to determine whether multiple libraries of data will need to be created based upon the different types of patients who come in, he said.

The study was funded by the United States Air Force. Dr. Bonds and his coauthors reported no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
TBI, intracranial pressure, EAST
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – An algorithm might predict whether patients with severe traumatic brain injury are recovering well or need interventions to preempt evolving intracranial hypertension.

“Valid predictive algorithms have the potential to revolutionize the care of patients with traumatic brain injury [TBI] and transform physiologic data from just a pure numeric value buried in a never-ending nursing flow sheet into a useful triage and decision-assist tool,” study author Dr. Brandon Bonds said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Brandon Bonds

A minimum of 10 hours of continuous data on vital signs (intracranial pressure, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, shock index, and mean arterial pressure) were used to predict intracranial pressure (ICP) values for a retrospective cohort of 132 adults with severe TBI, 97% of which was the result of blunt trauma. Even relatively brief episodes of elevated ICP have been shown to be associated with poor outcomes in TBI patients, while marked elevation of ICP may lead to herniation and death, said Dr. Bonds of the R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland, Baltimore.

At the trauma center, vital signs are automatically collected every 6 seconds, 24 hours a day, on all TBI patients. This granularity of data was used to map patterns in the patients’ physiology. The approach used a nearest neighbor regression (NNR) method: A model was constructed that predicts future numerical values for an individual based on comparisons to data from historical subjects.

The same mathematical principal is used by a variety of industries to predict likely responses. NetFlix, for example, uses a system similar to the NNR method to predict future television and movie picks based on prior selections, Dr. Bonds explained.

About 20 minutes of continuously collected, automated vital sign data were then used to test the algorithm on a per-patient basis. The algorithm was used to predict future ICP values at 5 minutes to 2 hours from that time. The predictions are made on a rolling basis, with patient data updates every 5 minutes.

The NNR model was good at predicting actual ICP at 5 minutes, with a bias of 0.02 (± 2 standard deviations of 4 mm Hg). As expected, agreement was somewhat lessened at 2 hours (± 2 standard deviations of 10 mm Hg), “but this may still represent a clinically significant value,” Dr. Bonds said.

The next step is a prospective study of the algorithm’s utility.

Dr. Bonds said that NNR research really isn’t all that alien to medicine. Think about the experienced emergency physician who can look out into the wait room and “tell the nurse to bring back [a certain patient] because he didn’t look good,” Dr. Bonds said. Such a physician uses “the minimum amount of data he has and compares that patient to the historic data set of the thousands of patients that he’s seen previously to identify a patient that’s not going to do well. What we’re trying to do with this model is take this subjective skill and turn it into an objective tool.”

In an interview, session comoderator Dr. David A. Hampton, M.Eng., of Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, commented that he could definitely see the NNR method eventually having utility in severe TBI.

Future work will need to address outliers in the data because the standard deviation of 4 mm Hg “is pretty big for ICP swings” and to determine whether multiple libraries of data will need to be created based upon the different types of patients who come in, he said.

The study was funded by the United States Air Force. Dr. Bonds and his coauthors reported no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – An algorithm might predict whether patients with severe traumatic brain injury are recovering well or need interventions to preempt evolving intracranial hypertension.

“Valid predictive algorithms have the potential to revolutionize the care of patients with traumatic brain injury [TBI] and transform physiologic data from just a pure numeric value buried in a never-ending nursing flow sheet into a useful triage and decision-assist tool,” study author Dr. Brandon Bonds said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Brandon Bonds

A minimum of 10 hours of continuous data on vital signs (intracranial pressure, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, shock index, and mean arterial pressure) were used to predict intracranial pressure (ICP) values for a retrospective cohort of 132 adults with severe TBI, 97% of which was the result of blunt trauma. Even relatively brief episodes of elevated ICP have been shown to be associated with poor outcomes in TBI patients, while marked elevation of ICP may lead to herniation and death, said Dr. Bonds of the R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland, Baltimore.

At the trauma center, vital signs are automatically collected every 6 seconds, 24 hours a day, on all TBI patients. This granularity of data was used to map patterns in the patients’ physiology. The approach used a nearest neighbor regression (NNR) method: A model was constructed that predicts future numerical values for an individual based on comparisons to data from historical subjects.

The same mathematical principal is used by a variety of industries to predict likely responses. NetFlix, for example, uses a system similar to the NNR method to predict future television and movie picks based on prior selections, Dr. Bonds explained.

About 20 minutes of continuously collected, automated vital sign data were then used to test the algorithm on a per-patient basis. The algorithm was used to predict future ICP values at 5 minutes to 2 hours from that time. The predictions are made on a rolling basis, with patient data updates every 5 minutes.

The NNR model was good at predicting actual ICP at 5 minutes, with a bias of 0.02 (± 2 standard deviations of 4 mm Hg). As expected, agreement was somewhat lessened at 2 hours (± 2 standard deviations of 10 mm Hg), “but this may still represent a clinically significant value,” Dr. Bonds said.

The next step is a prospective study of the algorithm’s utility.

Dr. Bonds said that NNR research really isn’t all that alien to medicine. Think about the experienced emergency physician who can look out into the wait room and “tell the nurse to bring back [a certain patient] because he didn’t look good,” Dr. Bonds said. Such a physician uses “the minimum amount of data he has and compares that patient to the historic data set of the thousands of patients that he’s seen previously to identify a patient that’s not going to do well. What we’re trying to do with this model is take this subjective skill and turn it into an objective tool.”

In an interview, session comoderator Dr. David A. Hampton, M.Eng., of Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, commented that he could definitely see the NNR method eventually having utility in severe TBI.

Future work will need to address outliers in the data because the standard deviation of 4 mm Hg “is pretty big for ICP swings” and to determine whether multiple libraries of data will need to be created based upon the different types of patients who come in, he said.

The study was funded by the United States Air Force. Dr. Bonds and his coauthors reported no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Algorithm may predict intracranial pressure swings after TBI
Display Headline
Algorithm may predict intracranial pressure swings after TBI
Legacy Keywords
TBI, intracranial pressure, EAST
Legacy Keywords
TBI, intracranial pressure, EAST
Sections
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: A short duration of vital sign data might prove useful for forecasting secondary intracranial pressure swings after traumatic brain injury.

Major finding: A model based on data from severe TBI patients predicted fluctuations in ICP at 5 minutes with a standard deviation of 4 mm Hg.

Data source: Retrospective study in 132 patients.

Disclosures: The study was funded by the United States Air Force. Dr. Bonds and his coauthors reported no financial disclosures.

VTE risk climbs in patients on contact isolation

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 09:07
Display Headline
VTE risk climbs in patients on contact isolation

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Trauma patients on contact isolation were nearly six times more likely to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE) as those who were not isolated, based on an analysis of 4,317 patients.

VTE occurred in 17.5% (44/251) of patients on contact isolation and 3.5% (141/4,066) of patients who were not isolated (P < .0001). Injury Severity Score (ISS), age, male gender, and obesity also were significantly associated with the risk of VTE.

The relationship between VTE risk and contact isolation remained significant after adjusting for gender, age, ISS, and comorbidities (odds ratio, 3.28; P < .0001), Dr. Robert Ferguson reported at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Odds ratios also were significantly elevated for obesity (OR, 2.35; P < .006), male gender (OR, 2.1; P < .0001), ISS (OR, 1.08; P < .0001), and age (OR, 1.02; P < .0001). The presence of diabetes, dementia/Alzheimer’s, history of cerebrovascular accident, psychiatric disease, cirrhosis, cancer, or alcohol abuse was not statistically significant.

The increased risk for VTE in trauma patients on contact isolation “is likely multifactorial in nature and is related but not limited to decreased ambulation, noncompliance with prophylaxis, and restricted access by staff,” said Dr. Ferguson, a third-year resident at the Virginia Tech, Roanoke.

The risk:benefit ratio of contact isolation in the trauma population needs to be reevaluated, the researchers concluded. “We encourage hospital committees to alter protocols and supplement strategies such as staff education, dedicated ambulation areas and/or isolation wards, and eliminate contact isolation following routine methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus surveillance screening.”

Dr. Ferguson and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Trauma patients on contact isolation were nearly six times more likely to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE) as those who were not isolated, based on an analysis of 4,317 patients.

VTE occurred in 17.5% (44/251) of patients on contact isolation and 3.5% (141/4,066) of patients who were not isolated (P < .0001). Injury Severity Score (ISS), age, male gender, and obesity also were significantly associated with the risk of VTE.

The relationship between VTE risk and contact isolation remained significant after adjusting for gender, age, ISS, and comorbidities (odds ratio, 3.28; P < .0001), Dr. Robert Ferguson reported at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Odds ratios also were significantly elevated for obesity (OR, 2.35; P < .006), male gender (OR, 2.1; P < .0001), ISS (OR, 1.08; P < .0001), and age (OR, 1.02; P < .0001). The presence of diabetes, dementia/Alzheimer’s, history of cerebrovascular accident, psychiatric disease, cirrhosis, cancer, or alcohol abuse was not statistically significant.

The increased risk for VTE in trauma patients on contact isolation “is likely multifactorial in nature and is related but not limited to decreased ambulation, noncompliance with prophylaxis, and restricted access by staff,” said Dr. Ferguson, a third-year resident at the Virginia Tech, Roanoke.

The risk:benefit ratio of contact isolation in the trauma population needs to be reevaluated, the researchers concluded. “We encourage hospital committees to alter protocols and supplement strategies such as staff education, dedicated ambulation areas and/or isolation wards, and eliminate contact isolation following routine methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus surveillance screening.”

Dr. Ferguson and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Trauma patients on contact isolation were nearly six times more likely to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE) as those who were not isolated, based on an analysis of 4,317 patients.

VTE occurred in 17.5% (44/251) of patients on contact isolation and 3.5% (141/4,066) of patients who were not isolated (P < .0001). Injury Severity Score (ISS), age, male gender, and obesity also were significantly associated with the risk of VTE.

The relationship between VTE risk and contact isolation remained significant after adjusting for gender, age, ISS, and comorbidities (odds ratio, 3.28; P < .0001), Dr. Robert Ferguson reported at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Odds ratios also were significantly elevated for obesity (OR, 2.35; P < .006), male gender (OR, 2.1; P < .0001), ISS (OR, 1.08; P < .0001), and age (OR, 1.02; P < .0001). The presence of diabetes, dementia/Alzheimer’s, history of cerebrovascular accident, psychiatric disease, cirrhosis, cancer, or alcohol abuse was not statistically significant.

The increased risk for VTE in trauma patients on contact isolation “is likely multifactorial in nature and is related but not limited to decreased ambulation, noncompliance with prophylaxis, and restricted access by staff,” said Dr. Ferguson, a third-year resident at the Virginia Tech, Roanoke.

The risk:benefit ratio of contact isolation in the trauma population needs to be reevaluated, the researchers concluded. “We encourage hospital committees to alter protocols and supplement strategies such as staff education, dedicated ambulation areas and/or isolation wards, and eliminate contact isolation following routine methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus surveillance screening.”

Dr. Ferguson and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
VTE risk climbs in patients on contact isolation
Display Headline
VTE risk climbs in patients on contact isolation
Sections
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: Trauma patients on contact isolation are significantly predisposed to develop VTE.

Major finding: VTE occurred in 17.5% of patients on contact isolation and 3.5% not isolated (P < .0001).

Data source: Retrospective analysis of 4,317 trauma patients.

Disclosures: Dr. Ferguson and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

Certified ACS trauma centers move the dial on patient outcomes

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 15:31
Display Headline
Certified ACS trauma centers move the dial on patient outcomes

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Patients undergoing emergency general surgery appear to fare better if managed at a certified acute care surgery trauma center, a nationwide analysis suggests.

“Patients managed at acute care surgery trauma centers had lower complication rates, shorter hospital length of stay, and lower hospital costs,” lead study author Dr. Mazhar Khalil said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Several single-institution studies have reported improved patient outcomes and system efficiencies following the 2008 creation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Acute Care Surgery fellowship. The ACS model has been endorsed by several professional organizations including EAST and the American College of Surgeons, but national outcomes have never been studied.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Mazhar Khalil

Dr. Khalil and his colleagues conducted a 1-year retrospective analysis of 131,410 patients who underwent emergency general surgery in 2011 in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. The NIS is the largest all-payer, in-patient database in the United States and represents a stratified sample of 20% of all hospital discharges including 4,121 hospitals across 44 states.

ICD-9 codes were used to identify emergency general surgery procedures, defined as appendectomy, cholecystectomy, hernia repair, and small and large bowel resections. A total of 75,930 patients (58%) were managed at non–trauma centers (NTC), 47,753 (36%) at trauma centers (TC), and 7,727 (6%) at acute care surgery trauma centers (ACS-TC). Weekend admission rates were constant across all three groups at about 24%, as were the types of procedures performed.

In-hospital complications occurred in 18.1% of patients managed at AAST-certified acute care surgery trauma centers versus 18.7% among those at non–trauma centers and 19.4% at trauma centers (P = .04), Dr. Khalil, an international trauma fellow at the University of Arizona in Tucson, reported.

Between-group differences reached statistical significance for urinary tract infections (6.5% vs. 6.8% vs. 7.2%; P = .02), but not for the other complications of pneumonia, surgical site infection, sepsis, or reoperation.

AAST-certified ACS-TC patients had significantly shorter hospital stays than NTC or TC patients (7.2 days vs. 7.9 days vs. 8.5 days; P = .04) and lower average hospital costs ($60,000 vs. $70,000 vs. $67,000; P = .03), he said.

There was no difference in mortality across the three groups (2.1% vs. 2.4% vs. 2.2%; P = .12).

In multivariable analysis adjusted for age, gender, race, Charlson comorbidity index, type of procedure, complications, and weekend admission, patients at AAST-certified ACS-TC centers had lower odds than those at trauma centers for in-hospital complications (Odds ratio, 0.95 vs. 1.1) and hospital length of stay (OR, 0.91 vs. 1.2). Again, mortality was similar (OR, 0.98 vs. 1.07), Dr. Khalil said.

“The AAST-verified acute care surgery model should be a potential component of trauma programs practicing emergency general surgery,” he concluded.

During a discussion of the paper, concerns were raised that the results would be viewed as an overarching judgment of acute care surgery and whether the investigators could be certain the trauma centers were appropriately classified and the surgeries performed by an ACS fellow. Without correct classification, the entire premise of the paper could be undermined, it was argued.

Trauma center status was determined using the location of the center as provided in the NIS and cross-referenced with the American College of Surgeons Trauma registry, Dr. Khalil said. It was not possible to identify the centers that practice the ACS model, but are not certified by AAST.

He went on to say, “All these studies do is set up a foundation for future prospective studies. They are not definitive, authoritative answers to say that this is better than that.”

Dr. Khalil and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
AAST, ACS, acute care surgery, trauma, EAST
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Patients undergoing emergency general surgery appear to fare better if managed at a certified acute care surgery trauma center, a nationwide analysis suggests.

“Patients managed at acute care surgery trauma centers had lower complication rates, shorter hospital length of stay, and lower hospital costs,” lead study author Dr. Mazhar Khalil said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Several single-institution studies have reported improved patient outcomes and system efficiencies following the 2008 creation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Acute Care Surgery fellowship. The ACS model has been endorsed by several professional organizations including EAST and the American College of Surgeons, but national outcomes have never been studied.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Mazhar Khalil

Dr. Khalil and his colleagues conducted a 1-year retrospective analysis of 131,410 patients who underwent emergency general surgery in 2011 in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. The NIS is the largest all-payer, in-patient database in the United States and represents a stratified sample of 20% of all hospital discharges including 4,121 hospitals across 44 states.

ICD-9 codes were used to identify emergency general surgery procedures, defined as appendectomy, cholecystectomy, hernia repair, and small and large bowel resections. A total of 75,930 patients (58%) were managed at non–trauma centers (NTC), 47,753 (36%) at trauma centers (TC), and 7,727 (6%) at acute care surgery trauma centers (ACS-TC). Weekend admission rates were constant across all three groups at about 24%, as were the types of procedures performed.

In-hospital complications occurred in 18.1% of patients managed at AAST-certified acute care surgery trauma centers versus 18.7% among those at non–trauma centers and 19.4% at trauma centers (P = .04), Dr. Khalil, an international trauma fellow at the University of Arizona in Tucson, reported.

Between-group differences reached statistical significance for urinary tract infections (6.5% vs. 6.8% vs. 7.2%; P = .02), but not for the other complications of pneumonia, surgical site infection, sepsis, or reoperation.

AAST-certified ACS-TC patients had significantly shorter hospital stays than NTC or TC patients (7.2 days vs. 7.9 days vs. 8.5 days; P = .04) and lower average hospital costs ($60,000 vs. $70,000 vs. $67,000; P = .03), he said.

There was no difference in mortality across the three groups (2.1% vs. 2.4% vs. 2.2%; P = .12).

In multivariable analysis adjusted for age, gender, race, Charlson comorbidity index, type of procedure, complications, and weekend admission, patients at AAST-certified ACS-TC centers had lower odds than those at trauma centers for in-hospital complications (Odds ratio, 0.95 vs. 1.1) and hospital length of stay (OR, 0.91 vs. 1.2). Again, mortality was similar (OR, 0.98 vs. 1.07), Dr. Khalil said.

“The AAST-verified acute care surgery model should be a potential component of trauma programs practicing emergency general surgery,” he concluded.

During a discussion of the paper, concerns were raised that the results would be viewed as an overarching judgment of acute care surgery and whether the investigators could be certain the trauma centers were appropriately classified and the surgeries performed by an ACS fellow. Without correct classification, the entire premise of the paper could be undermined, it was argued.

Trauma center status was determined using the location of the center as provided in the NIS and cross-referenced with the American College of Surgeons Trauma registry, Dr. Khalil said. It was not possible to identify the centers that practice the ACS model, but are not certified by AAST.

He went on to say, “All these studies do is set up a foundation for future prospective studies. They are not definitive, authoritative answers to say that this is better than that.”

Dr. Khalil and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – Patients undergoing emergency general surgery appear to fare better if managed at a certified acute care surgery trauma center, a nationwide analysis suggests.

“Patients managed at acute care surgery trauma centers had lower complication rates, shorter hospital length of stay, and lower hospital costs,” lead study author Dr. Mazhar Khalil said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Several single-institution studies have reported improved patient outcomes and system efficiencies following the 2008 creation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Acute Care Surgery fellowship. The ACS model has been endorsed by several professional organizations including EAST and the American College of Surgeons, but national outcomes have never been studied.

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Mazhar Khalil

Dr. Khalil and his colleagues conducted a 1-year retrospective analysis of 131,410 patients who underwent emergency general surgery in 2011 in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. The NIS is the largest all-payer, in-patient database in the United States and represents a stratified sample of 20% of all hospital discharges including 4,121 hospitals across 44 states.

ICD-9 codes were used to identify emergency general surgery procedures, defined as appendectomy, cholecystectomy, hernia repair, and small and large bowel resections. A total of 75,930 patients (58%) were managed at non–trauma centers (NTC), 47,753 (36%) at trauma centers (TC), and 7,727 (6%) at acute care surgery trauma centers (ACS-TC). Weekend admission rates were constant across all three groups at about 24%, as were the types of procedures performed.

In-hospital complications occurred in 18.1% of patients managed at AAST-certified acute care surgery trauma centers versus 18.7% among those at non–trauma centers and 19.4% at trauma centers (P = .04), Dr. Khalil, an international trauma fellow at the University of Arizona in Tucson, reported.

Between-group differences reached statistical significance for urinary tract infections (6.5% vs. 6.8% vs. 7.2%; P = .02), but not for the other complications of pneumonia, surgical site infection, sepsis, or reoperation.

AAST-certified ACS-TC patients had significantly shorter hospital stays than NTC or TC patients (7.2 days vs. 7.9 days vs. 8.5 days; P = .04) and lower average hospital costs ($60,000 vs. $70,000 vs. $67,000; P = .03), he said.

There was no difference in mortality across the three groups (2.1% vs. 2.4% vs. 2.2%; P = .12).

In multivariable analysis adjusted for age, gender, race, Charlson comorbidity index, type of procedure, complications, and weekend admission, patients at AAST-certified ACS-TC centers had lower odds than those at trauma centers for in-hospital complications (Odds ratio, 0.95 vs. 1.1) and hospital length of stay (OR, 0.91 vs. 1.2). Again, mortality was similar (OR, 0.98 vs. 1.07), Dr. Khalil said.

“The AAST-verified acute care surgery model should be a potential component of trauma programs practicing emergency general surgery,” he concluded.

During a discussion of the paper, concerns were raised that the results would be viewed as an overarching judgment of acute care surgery and whether the investigators could be certain the trauma centers were appropriately classified and the surgeries performed by an ACS fellow. Without correct classification, the entire premise of the paper could be undermined, it was argued.

Trauma center status was determined using the location of the center as provided in the NIS and cross-referenced with the American College of Surgeons Trauma registry, Dr. Khalil said. It was not possible to identify the centers that practice the ACS model, but are not certified by AAST.

He went on to say, “All these studies do is set up a foundation for future prospective studies. They are not definitive, authoritative answers to say that this is better than that.”

Dr. Khalil and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Certified ACS trauma centers move the dial on patient outcomes
Display Headline
Certified ACS trauma centers move the dial on patient outcomes
Legacy Keywords
AAST, ACS, acute care surgery, trauma, EAST
Legacy Keywords
AAST, ACS, acute care surgery, trauma, EAST
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: Patients managed at certified acute care surgery trauma centers had fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower hospital costs.

Major finding: In-hospital complications rates were lower in patients at ACS trauma centers than at non–trauma centers and trauma centers (18.1% vs. 18.7% vs. 19.4%; P =.04).

Data source: Retrospective analysis of 131,410 emergency general surgery patients.

Disclosures: Dr. Khalil and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

Accurate ID of nonsalvageable trauma patients improves trauma center performance metrics

High-quality data needed
Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 09:07
Display Headline
Accurate ID of nonsalvageable trauma patients improves trauma center performance metrics

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FL – When does no sign of life mean a patient is unsalvageable?

A study has found that up to 33% of patients who local providers determined had no signs of life went on to live, and 10% of patients whose heart stopped before reaching the hospital actually survived.

Historically, there’s been significant variation across trauma centers and registries of how unsalvageable patients are identified. This presents a problem when measuring trauma center performance, particularly when you consider that 25% of deaths occur within 15 minutes of arrival at high-volume trauma centers, Dr. James P. Byrne, with the University of Toronto, explained.

“Variation within inclusion and exclusion criteria can lead to big differences in risk-adjusted trauma center mortality. Therefore, there’s a need for the adoption of a single-best definition for unsalvageable patients,” he said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST).

To that end, three case definitions of the unsalvageable patient were proposed based on data from the 2012-2013 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP) database. They were no signs of life as determined by local providers (NSOL), prehospital cardiac arrest (PHCA) as entered into local trauma registries, and a PROXY for death established by the ACS TQIP and defined as an emergency department heart rate of 0 and an ED systolic blood pressure of 0 and a Glasgow Coma Scale motor component of 1.

Over the study period, 223,643 patients from 192 trauma centers met the inclusion criteria of at least 16 years of age, blunt or penetrating mechanism of injury, and known hospital discharge status. In-hospital mortality was 7.2%.

NSOL and PHCA, had positive predictive values low enough (66.58% and 89.71%) such that 33% and 10% of patients meeting these criteria went on to survive.

The PROXY had excellent predictive utility for death (PPV 99.09%), with just 0.9% of PROXY patients going on to survive (22/2,424), he said.

To test its validity, the investigators looked more closely at the 2,424 patients who met PROXY criteria (15% of all deaths). PROXY patients mostly fell into two distinct groups: severe multisystem blunt injury caused by motor vehicle collision (MVC) and penetrating trauma to the head or chest caused by firearm, Dr. Byrne said. The median time to death was 8 minutes, with 87% dying in the ED.

Among the 22 unexpected PROXY survivors, 77% had penetrating trauma. Most had isolated injuries to the heart, lung, or large blood vessels and underwent thoracotomy (71%) or open cardiac massage (35%).

“We feel these patients are adequately explained for the most part, even though they come in without vital signs, as patients that have some chance for survival with prompt hemorrhage control surgery or cardiac repair,” Dr. Byrne said.

PROXY patients with penetrating injury rather than blunt injury were more likely to be male (90% vs. 73%), younger (34 years vs. 44 years), and fall victim to firearms or stabbing than an MVC (88% & 12% vs. 59%).

Overall, patients with penetrating injury were 10 times more likely to meet PROXY criteria than those with blunt injury (5.7% vs. 0.6%; P < .001).

“The characteristics of the PROXY patients, as well as the significant association with penetrating trauma, is something that we know to be true for patients who die early from trauma,” Dr. Byrne said.

In contrast, the 13,659 patients who died without meeting PROXY criteria were older (mean age, 60 years), 72% had severe head injury from falls or MVC, and their median time to death was 52 hours.

“We feel these patients represent alternative trajectories to death that are not predicted by presenting characteristics,” he said. “This actually lends construct validity to the PROXY definition since it was able to isolate patients who died early, while excluding those patients who died later and might have a chance for a modifiable outcome.”

Finally, a hierarchical linear model that calculated risk-adjusted mortality was used to look at the influence of including nonsalvageable patients on trauma center performance. Based on the model, 36 trauma centers (19%) were below-average performers and 29 (15%) were above-average performers.

After excluding PROXY patients, 64% of trauma centers changed rank, 17% by three or more positions, but only two centers changed outlier status. The latter suggests that inclusion of unsalvageable PROXY patients would have a minor impact on risk-adjusted mortality used for peer-to-peer benchmarking. However, their inclusion could have a big impact on benchmarking at centers that receive unsalvageable patients more frequently and therefore, PROXY should be used to exclude them from registries, Dr. Byrne said.

 

 

Poster discussion comoderator Christopher J. Dente from Emory University in Atlanta, said the reason the PROXY model performs so well is that it is something that could easily translate from the bedside into a registry and from a registry to a national database, whereas measures like “no signs of life” have to translate from the field to the bedside to the registry and then TQIP.

“The same is true for prehospital cardiac arrest, which you’d think would be a little more tangible, but isn’t necessarily,” Dr. Dente said. “This is incredibly important work.”

Dr. Byrne and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Body

Byrne et al.’s study evaluating three criteria for identifying unsalvageable trauma patients demonstrates the critical role that high-quality data can play in quality improvement efforts. Using data from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP), they developed a proxy measure that resulted in less than 1% of patients being incorrectly classified as unsalvageable.

Having an accurate, easy-to-calculate model for predicting survival is essential in applying these findings at the point of care, as the decision of whether or not to perform a resuscitative thoracotomy must be made expediently. An accurate model also allows resources to be concentrated on those who might derive the most benefit and minimizes the known harms, particularly to health care providers, and costs associated with resuscitative thoracotomies. Finally, an accurate model is necessary to ensure that benchmarking accurately reflects quality of care rather than case mix, and that efforts are appropriately directed toward those centers whose adjusted mortality is above expected, whether or not they are outliers.

Future efforts should be directed toward evaluating whether implementation of this proxy measure into clinical practice improves not just survival but survival with good functional status at a longer term end point.

Dr. Lillian S. Kao is an ACS Fellow and associate professor of surgery at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
DOA, trauma, ACS TQIP, benchmarking, EAST
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event
Body

Byrne et al.’s study evaluating three criteria for identifying unsalvageable trauma patients demonstrates the critical role that high-quality data can play in quality improvement efforts. Using data from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP), they developed a proxy measure that resulted in less than 1% of patients being incorrectly classified as unsalvageable.

Having an accurate, easy-to-calculate model for predicting survival is essential in applying these findings at the point of care, as the decision of whether or not to perform a resuscitative thoracotomy must be made expediently. An accurate model also allows resources to be concentrated on those who might derive the most benefit and minimizes the known harms, particularly to health care providers, and costs associated with resuscitative thoracotomies. Finally, an accurate model is necessary to ensure that benchmarking accurately reflects quality of care rather than case mix, and that efforts are appropriately directed toward those centers whose adjusted mortality is above expected, whether or not they are outliers.

Future efforts should be directed toward evaluating whether implementation of this proxy measure into clinical practice improves not just survival but survival with good functional status at a longer term end point.

Dr. Lillian S. Kao is an ACS Fellow and associate professor of surgery at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.

Body

Byrne et al.’s study evaluating three criteria for identifying unsalvageable trauma patients demonstrates the critical role that high-quality data can play in quality improvement efforts. Using data from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP), they developed a proxy measure that resulted in less than 1% of patients being incorrectly classified as unsalvageable.

Having an accurate, easy-to-calculate model for predicting survival is essential in applying these findings at the point of care, as the decision of whether or not to perform a resuscitative thoracotomy must be made expediently. An accurate model also allows resources to be concentrated on those who might derive the most benefit and minimizes the known harms, particularly to health care providers, and costs associated with resuscitative thoracotomies. Finally, an accurate model is necessary to ensure that benchmarking accurately reflects quality of care rather than case mix, and that efforts are appropriately directed toward those centers whose adjusted mortality is above expected, whether or not they are outliers.

Future efforts should be directed toward evaluating whether implementation of this proxy measure into clinical practice improves not just survival but survival with good functional status at a longer term end point.

Dr. Lillian S. Kao is an ACS Fellow and associate professor of surgery at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.

Title
High-quality data needed
High-quality data needed

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FL – When does no sign of life mean a patient is unsalvageable?

A study has found that up to 33% of patients who local providers determined had no signs of life went on to live, and 10% of patients whose heart stopped before reaching the hospital actually survived.

Historically, there’s been significant variation across trauma centers and registries of how unsalvageable patients are identified. This presents a problem when measuring trauma center performance, particularly when you consider that 25% of deaths occur within 15 minutes of arrival at high-volume trauma centers, Dr. James P. Byrne, with the University of Toronto, explained.

“Variation within inclusion and exclusion criteria can lead to big differences in risk-adjusted trauma center mortality. Therefore, there’s a need for the adoption of a single-best definition for unsalvageable patients,” he said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST).

To that end, three case definitions of the unsalvageable patient were proposed based on data from the 2012-2013 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP) database. They were no signs of life as determined by local providers (NSOL), prehospital cardiac arrest (PHCA) as entered into local trauma registries, and a PROXY for death established by the ACS TQIP and defined as an emergency department heart rate of 0 and an ED systolic blood pressure of 0 and a Glasgow Coma Scale motor component of 1.

Over the study period, 223,643 patients from 192 trauma centers met the inclusion criteria of at least 16 years of age, blunt or penetrating mechanism of injury, and known hospital discharge status. In-hospital mortality was 7.2%.

NSOL and PHCA, had positive predictive values low enough (66.58% and 89.71%) such that 33% and 10% of patients meeting these criteria went on to survive.

The PROXY had excellent predictive utility for death (PPV 99.09%), with just 0.9% of PROXY patients going on to survive (22/2,424), he said.

To test its validity, the investigators looked more closely at the 2,424 patients who met PROXY criteria (15% of all deaths). PROXY patients mostly fell into two distinct groups: severe multisystem blunt injury caused by motor vehicle collision (MVC) and penetrating trauma to the head or chest caused by firearm, Dr. Byrne said. The median time to death was 8 minutes, with 87% dying in the ED.

Among the 22 unexpected PROXY survivors, 77% had penetrating trauma. Most had isolated injuries to the heart, lung, or large blood vessels and underwent thoracotomy (71%) or open cardiac massage (35%).

“We feel these patients are adequately explained for the most part, even though they come in without vital signs, as patients that have some chance for survival with prompt hemorrhage control surgery or cardiac repair,” Dr. Byrne said.

PROXY patients with penetrating injury rather than blunt injury were more likely to be male (90% vs. 73%), younger (34 years vs. 44 years), and fall victim to firearms or stabbing than an MVC (88% & 12% vs. 59%).

Overall, patients with penetrating injury were 10 times more likely to meet PROXY criteria than those with blunt injury (5.7% vs. 0.6%; P < .001).

“The characteristics of the PROXY patients, as well as the significant association with penetrating trauma, is something that we know to be true for patients who die early from trauma,” Dr. Byrne said.

In contrast, the 13,659 patients who died without meeting PROXY criteria were older (mean age, 60 years), 72% had severe head injury from falls or MVC, and their median time to death was 52 hours.

“We feel these patients represent alternative trajectories to death that are not predicted by presenting characteristics,” he said. “This actually lends construct validity to the PROXY definition since it was able to isolate patients who died early, while excluding those patients who died later and might have a chance for a modifiable outcome.”

Finally, a hierarchical linear model that calculated risk-adjusted mortality was used to look at the influence of including nonsalvageable patients on trauma center performance. Based on the model, 36 trauma centers (19%) were below-average performers and 29 (15%) were above-average performers.

After excluding PROXY patients, 64% of trauma centers changed rank, 17% by three or more positions, but only two centers changed outlier status. The latter suggests that inclusion of unsalvageable PROXY patients would have a minor impact on risk-adjusted mortality used for peer-to-peer benchmarking. However, their inclusion could have a big impact on benchmarking at centers that receive unsalvageable patients more frequently and therefore, PROXY should be used to exclude them from registries, Dr. Byrne said.

 

 

Poster discussion comoderator Christopher J. Dente from Emory University in Atlanta, said the reason the PROXY model performs so well is that it is something that could easily translate from the bedside into a registry and from a registry to a national database, whereas measures like “no signs of life” have to translate from the field to the bedside to the registry and then TQIP.

“The same is true for prehospital cardiac arrest, which you’d think would be a little more tangible, but isn’t necessarily,” Dr. Dente said. “This is incredibly important work.”

Dr. Byrne and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FL – When does no sign of life mean a patient is unsalvageable?

A study has found that up to 33% of patients who local providers determined had no signs of life went on to live, and 10% of patients whose heart stopped before reaching the hospital actually survived.

Historically, there’s been significant variation across trauma centers and registries of how unsalvageable patients are identified. This presents a problem when measuring trauma center performance, particularly when you consider that 25% of deaths occur within 15 minutes of arrival at high-volume trauma centers, Dr. James P. Byrne, with the University of Toronto, explained.

“Variation within inclusion and exclusion criteria can lead to big differences in risk-adjusted trauma center mortality. Therefore, there’s a need for the adoption of a single-best definition for unsalvageable patients,” he said at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST).

To that end, three case definitions of the unsalvageable patient were proposed based on data from the 2012-2013 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP) database. They were no signs of life as determined by local providers (NSOL), prehospital cardiac arrest (PHCA) as entered into local trauma registries, and a PROXY for death established by the ACS TQIP and defined as an emergency department heart rate of 0 and an ED systolic blood pressure of 0 and a Glasgow Coma Scale motor component of 1.

Over the study period, 223,643 patients from 192 trauma centers met the inclusion criteria of at least 16 years of age, blunt or penetrating mechanism of injury, and known hospital discharge status. In-hospital mortality was 7.2%.

NSOL and PHCA, had positive predictive values low enough (66.58% and 89.71%) such that 33% and 10% of patients meeting these criteria went on to survive.

The PROXY had excellent predictive utility for death (PPV 99.09%), with just 0.9% of PROXY patients going on to survive (22/2,424), he said.

To test its validity, the investigators looked more closely at the 2,424 patients who met PROXY criteria (15% of all deaths). PROXY patients mostly fell into two distinct groups: severe multisystem blunt injury caused by motor vehicle collision (MVC) and penetrating trauma to the head or chest caused by firearm, Dr. Byrne said. The median time to death was 8 minutes, with 87% dying in the ED.

Among the 22 unexpected PROXY survivors, 77% had penetrating trauma. Most had isolated injuries to the heart, lung, or large blood vessels and underwent thoracotomy (71%) or open cardiac massage (35%).

“We feel these patients are adequately explained for the most part, even though they come in without vital signs, as patients that have some chance for survival with prompt hemorrhage control surgery or cardiac repair,” Dr. Byrne said.

PROXY patients with penetrating injury rather than blunt injury were more likely to be male (90% vs. 73%), younger (34 years vs. 44 years), and fall victim to firearms or stabbing than an MVC (88% & 12% vs. 59%).

Overall, patients with penetrating injury were 10 times more likely to meet PROXY criteria than those with blunt injury (5.7% vs. 0.6%; P < .001).

“The characteristics of the PROXY patients, as well as the significant association with penetrating trauma, is something that we know to be true for patients who die early from trauma,” Dr. Byrne said.

In contrast, the 13,659 patients who died without meeting PROXY criteria were older (mean age, 60 years), 72% had severe head injury from falls or MVC, and their median time to death was 52 hours.

“We feel these patients represent alternative trajectories to death that are not predicted by presenting characteristics,” he said. “This actually lends construct validity to the PROXY definition since it was able to isolate patients who died early, while excluding those patients who died later and might have a chance for a modifiable outcome.”

Finally, a hierarchical linear model that calculated risk-adjusted mortality was used to look at the influence of including nonsalvageable patients on trauma center performance. Based on the model, 36 trauma centers (19%) were below-average performers and 29 (15%) were above-average performers.

After excluding PROXY patients, 64% of trauma centers changed rank, 17% by three or more positions, but only two centers changed outlier status. The latter suggests that inclusion of unsalvageable PROXY patients would have a minor impact on risk-adjusted mortality used for peer-to-peer benchmarking. However, their inclusion could have a big impact on benchmarking at centers that receive unsalvageable patients more frequently and therefore, PROXY should be used to exclude them from registries, Dr. Byrne said.

 

 

Poster discussion comoderator Christopher J. Dente from Emory University in Atlanta, said the reason the PROXY model performs so well is that it is something that could easily translate from the bedside into a registry and from a registry to a national database, whereas measures like “no signs of life” have to translate from the field to the bedside to the registry and then TQIP.

“The same is true for prehospital cardiac arrest, which you’d think would be a little more tangible, but isn’t necessarily,” Dr. Dente said. “This is incredibly important work.”

Dr. Byrne and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Accurate ID of nonsalvageable trauma patients improves trauma center performance metrics
Display Headline
Accurate ID of nonsalvageable trauma patients improves trauma center performance metrics
Legacy Keywords
DOA, trauma, ACS TQIP, benchmarking, EAST
Legacy Keywords
DOA, trauma, ACS TQIP, benchmarking, EAST
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY 2015

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: The ACS TQIP proxy definition of DOA should be used to exclude unsalvageable patients from peer-to-peer benchmarking and performance improvement efforts.

Major finding: Just 0.9% of patients identified as being unsalvageable by the PROXY criteria went on to survive.

Data source: Retrospective analysis of 223,643 trauma patients in the ACS TQIP database.

Disclosures: Dr. Byrne and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

New scoring system for small bowel–obstruction severity

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 09:07
Display Headline
New scoring system for small bowel–obstruction severity

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – A novel three-item scoring system reliably categorizes severity of small bowel obstruction and is more strongly associated with in-hospital mortality than the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma anatomic score alone.

The AAST developed a scoring system to standardize the severity of small-bowel obstruction (SBO) based on anatomic criteria. Its authors have subsequently recommended, however, that other parametersare needed that would take into consideration the entirety of the patient’s clinical situation (J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77:705-8 and J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76:884-7).

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Yaser Baghdadi

To that end, investigators at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., created the Acute General Emergency Surgical Severity-Small Bowel Obstruction (AGESS-SBO) system that incorporates presenting physiology and pre-existing comorbidities with anatomic criteria.

“It’s evident that the complications and patient outcomes clearly depend on the extent of the involvement of the diseased organ, but also depend on the hosting environment, which means the patient’s physiology and pre-existing conditions,” Dr. Yaser Baghdadi explained at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

He reported a cohort study involving 377 patients who were treated for SBO at the Mayo Clinic between 2009 and 2012 and evaluated using anatomic criteria and the AGESS-SBO, which uses a 5-point scoring system for each of its three scales.

Most patients (57%) received a score of 1 on the AGESS-SBO anatomic involvement scale for a partial SBO without need of operation, while only 1% had a score of 5, indicating strangulation and perforation with diffuse peritoneal contamination.

On the physiology scale, 58.6% had no physiologic derangement or a score of 0, 36% had a score of 1 because of systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and only 1.1% had a score of 5 for multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

A Charlson comorbid score of 1 or 2 earned 32% of patients 1 point on the comorbidity scale, while 4% had a score of 5 because of a Charlson score of 9 or more.

In all, 215 patients (57%) had nonoperative treatment and 162 patients (43%) underwent surgical exploration. The median overall AGESS-SBO score was 6 points (interquartile range [IQR], 3-13 points).

The median length of stay (LOS) was 5 days (IQR, 3-9.5 days), with 94 patients (25%) having a stay exceeding 9.5 days, Dr. Baghdadi said in the poster presentation. In-hospital complications occurred in 82 patients (22%) and eight patients (2%) died during their hospital stay.

Comparison of the areas under receiver operative characteristic curves revealed a statistically significant greater association between the AGESS-SBO score and in-hospital mortality than the AAST anatomic score (AUC, 0.79 vs. 0.55, P value = .015), reported Dr. Baghdadi, a research fellow in the Mayo Clinic’s trauma division.

The two scoring systems had comparable ability to predict in-hospital complications (AUC, 0.72 vs. 0.69; P = .42) and extended LOS (AUC, 0.72 vs. 0.74; P = .47). The lack of statistical significance favoring the AGESS-SBO may be because these outcomes would be more likely in patients requiring surgery and the analysis combined patients who did and did not require operative care, he said in an interview.

“The AGESS-SBO system is a useful tool to classify the disease severity among SBO patients compared to the AAST anatomic score alone. We are planning to run a prospective study to validate what we have found,” he added.

Dr. Baghdadi and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

Meeting/Event
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
small bowel obstruction, AATS, EAST, trauma, emergency surgery
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – A novel three-item scoring system reliably categorizes severity of small bowel obstruction and is more strongly associated with in-hospital mortality than the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma anatomic score alone.

The AAST developed a scoring system to standardize the severity of small-bowel obstruction (SBO) based on anatomic criteria. Its authors have subsequently recommended, however, that other parametersare needed that would take into consideration the entirety of the patient’s clinical situation (J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77:705-8 and J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76:884-7).

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Yaser Baghdadi

To that end, investigators at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., created the Acute General Emergency Surgical Severity-Small Bowel Obstruction (AGESS-SBO) system that incorporates presenting physiology and pre-existing comorbidities with anatomic criteria.

“It’s evident that the complications and patient outcomes clearly depend on the extent of the involvement of the diseased organ, but also depend on the hosting environment, which means the patient’s physiology and pre-existing conditions,” Dr. Yaser Baghdadi explained at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

He reported a cohort study involving 377 patients who were treated for SBO at the Mayo Clinic between 2009 and 2012 and evaluated using anatomic criteria and the AGESS-SBO, which uses a 5-point scoring system for each of its three scales.

Most patients (57%) received a score of 1 on the AGESS-SBO anatomic involvement scale for a partial SBO without need of operation, while only 1% had a score of 5, indicating strangulation and perforation with diffuse peritoneal contamination.

On the physiology scale, 58.6% had no physiologic derangement or a score of 0, 36% had a score of 1 because of systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and only 1.1% had a score of 5 for multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

A Charlson comorbid score of 1 or 2 earned 32% of patients 1 point on the comorbidity scale, while 4% had a score of 5 because of a Charlson score of 9 or more.

In all, 215 patients (57%) had nonoperative treatment and 162 patients (43%) underwent surgical exploration. The median overall AGESS-SBO score was 6 points (interquartile range [IQR], 3-13 points).

The median length of stay (LOS) was 5 days (IQR, 3-9.5 days), with 94 patients (25%) having a stay exceeding 9.5 days, Dr. Baghdadi said in the poster presentation. In-hospital complications occurred in 82 patients (22%) and eight patients (2%) died during their hospital stay.

Comparison of the areas under receiver operative characteristic curves revealed a statistically significant greater association between the AGESS-SBO score and in-hospital mortality than the AAST anatomic score (AUC, 0.79 vs. 0.55, P value = .015), reported Dr. Baghdadi, a research fellow in the Mayo Clinic’s trauma division.

The two scoring systems had comparable ability to predict in-hospital complications (AUC, 0.72 vs. 0.69; P = .42) and extended LOS (AUC, 0.72 vs. 0.74; P = .47). The lack of statistical significance favoring the AGESS-SBO may be because these outcomes would be more likely in patients requiring surgery and the analysis combined patients who did and did not require operative care, he said in an interview.

“The AGESS-SBO system is a useful tool to classify the disease severity among SBO patients compared to the AAST anatomic score alone. We are planning to run a prospective study to validate what we have found,” he added.

Dr. Baghdadi and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, FLA. – A novel three-item scoring system reliably categorizes severity of small bowel obstruction and is more strongly associated with in-hospital mortality than the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma anatomic score alone.

The AAST developed a scoring system to standardize the severity of small-bowel obstruction (SBO) based on anatomic criteria. Its authors have subsequently recommended, however, that other parametersare needed that would take into consideration the entirety of the patient’s clinical situation (J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77:705-8 and J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76:884-7).

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Yaser Baghdadi

To that end, investigators at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., created the Acute General Emergency Surgical Severity-Small Bowel Obstruction (AGESS-SBO) system that incorporates presenting physiology and pre-existing comorbidities with anatomic criteria.

“It’s evident that the complications and patient outcomes clearly depend on the extent of the involvement of the diseased organ, but also depend on the hosting environment, which means the patient’s physiology and pre-existing conditions,” Dr. Yaser Baghdadi explained at the annual scientific assembly of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

He reported a cohort study involving 377 patients who were treated for SBO at the Mayo Clinic between 2009 and 2012 and evaluated using anatomic criteria and the AGESS-SBO, which uses a 5-point scoring system for each of its three scales.

Most patients (57%) received a score of 1 on the AGESS-SBO anatomic involvement scale for a partial SBO without need of operation, while only 1% had a score of 5, indicating strangulation and perforation with diffuse peritoneal contamination.

On the physiology scale, 58.6% had no physiologic derangement or a score of 0, 36% had a score of 1 because of systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and only 1.1% had a score of 5 for multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

A Charlson comorbid score of 1 or 2 earned 32% of patients 1 point on the comorbidity scale, while 4% had a score of 5 because of a Charlson score of 9 or more.

In all, 215 patients (57%) had nonoperative treatment and 162 patients (43%) underwent surgical exploration. The median overall AGESS-SBO score was 6 points (interquartile range [IQR], 3-13 points).

The median length of stay (LOS) was 5 days (IQR, 3-9.5 days), with 94 patients (25%) having a stay exceeding 9.5 days, Dr. Baghdadi said in the poster presentation. In-hospital complications occurred in 82 patients (22%) and eight patients (2%) died during their hospital stay.

Comparison of the areas under receiver operative characteristic curves revealed a statistically significant greater association between the AGESS-SBO score and in-hospital mortality than the AAST anatomic score (AUC, 0.79 vs. 0.55, P value = .015), reported Dr. Baghdadi, a research fellow in the Mayo Clinic’s trauma division.

The two scoring systems had comparable ability to predict in-hospital complications (AUC, 0.72 vs. 0.69; P = .42) and extended LOS (AUC, 0.72 vs. 0.74; P = .47). The lack of statistical significance favoring the AGESS-SBO may be because these outcomes would be more likely in patients requiring surgery and the analysis combined patients who did and did not require operative care, he said in an interview.

“The AGESS-SBO system is a useful tool to classify the disease severity among SBO patients compared to the AAST anatomic score alone. We are planning to run a prospective study to validate what we have found,” he added.

Dr. Baghdadi and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
New scoring system for small bowel–obstruction severity
Display Headline
New scoring system for small bowel–obstruction severity
Legacy Keywords
small bowel obstruction, AATS, EAST, trauma, emergency surgery
Legacy Keywords
small bowel obstruction, AATS, EAST, trauma, emergency surgery
Sections
Article Source

AT THE EAST SCIENTIFIC ASSEMBLY

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Vitals

Key clinical point: Adding presenting physiology and comorbidities to anatomic criteria provides a reliable tool to categorize severity of small-bowel obstruction.

Major finding: The AGESS-SBO score was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality, versus the AAST anatomic score (area under ROC curves: 0.79 vs. 0.55; P = .015).

Data source: A cohort study of 377 patients treated for small-bowel obstruction.

Disclosures: Dr. Baghdadi and his coauthors reported having no financial disclosures.