RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: We sought to define the association of privilege on rates of unplanned surgery and perioperative outcomes for access-sensitive surgical conditions. BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health (SDOH) are critical in influencing timely access to healthcare. Privilege represents a right, benefit, advantage, or opportunity that positively influences all SDOH. METHODS: The California Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI) database identified patients who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, ventral hernia repair, or colectomy for colon cancer between 2017 and 2020 and was merged using ZIP codes with the Index of Concentration of Extremes, a validated measure of racial and economic privilege obtained from the American Community Survey. Clustered multivariable regression was performed to assess the association between privilege and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 185,316 patients who underwent a surgical procedure for one of three access-sensitive surgical conditions, roughly 1 in 5 individuals resided in areas with the highest (Q5; n=37,308; 20.1%) or lowest (Q1; n=36,352, 19.6%) privilege. Nearly one-half of the surgeries were unplanned (n=88,814, 46.9%), and colectomy for colon cancer was the most performed emergent procedure. Patients residing in the lowest privileged areas had higher rates of unplanned surgery compared with those residing in the highest privilege (Q1; 55.4% vs. 39.4%; referent: Q5; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.23, 95%CI 1.16-1.31; P<0.001). For each access-sensitive surgical condition, patients in the least privileged areas were more likely to experience higher rates of inpatient mortality (Q1; 3.1% vs. 2.1%; referent: Q5; adjusted OR, 1.41, 95%CI 1.24-1.60; P<0.001), perioperative complications (Q1; 30.4% vs. Q5; 23.8%; referent: Q5; adjusted OR, 1.24, 95%CI 1.18-1.31; P<0.001) and extended hospital stays (Q1; 26.3% vs. 20.1%; referent: Q5; adjusted OR, 1.16, 95%CI 1.09-1.22; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Privilege was associated with rates of unplanned surgery and adverse clinical outcomes. This indicates the role privilege as a key SDOH that influences patient access to and quality of surgical care.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize postoperative outcomes among patients who underwent an oncologic operation relative to whether the treating surgeon was an international medical graduate (IMG) versus a United States medical graduate (USMG). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: IMGs comprise approximately one-quarter of the physician workforce in the United States. METHODS: The 100% Medicare Standard Analytic Files were utilized to extract data on patients with breast, lung, hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB), and colorectal cancer who underwent surgical resection between 2014 and 2020. Entropy balancing (EB) and multivariable regression analysis were performed to evaluate the association between postoperative outcomes among USMG and IMG surgeons. RESULTS: Among 285,930 beneficiaries, 242,914 (85.0%) and 43,016 (15.0%) underwent surgery by a USMG and IMG surgeon, respectively. Overall, 129,576 (45.3%) individuals were male, and 168,848 (59.1%) patients had a Charlson Comorbidity Index score >2. Notably, IMG surgeons were more likely to care for racial/ethnic minority patients (14.7% vs. 12.5%) and those with a high social vulnerability index (33.3% vs. 32.1%) (all P<0.001). On multivariable analysis after EB, patients treated by an IMG surgeon were less likely to experience adverse postoperative outcomes including 90-day readmission (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.80-0.99) and index complications (OR 0.84, 95%CI 0.74-0.95) versus USMG surgeons (all P<0.05). Patients treated by IMG versus USMG surgeons had no difference in likelihood to achieve a textbook outcome (OR 1.10, 95%CI 0.99-1.21; P=0.077). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative outcomes among patients treated by IMG surgeons were roughly equivalent to those of USMG surgeons. In addition, IMG surgeons were more likely to care for patients with multiple comorbidities and individuals from vulnerable communities.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The association of hospital market competition, financial costs, and quality of oncologic care has not been well-defined. This study sought to evaluate variations in patient outcomes and financial expenditures after complex cancer surgery across high- and low-competition markets. METHODS: Medicare 100% Standard Analytic Files were used to identify patients with lung, esophageal, gastric, hepatopancreaticobiliary, or colorectal cancer who underwent surgical resection between 2018 and 2021. Data were merged with the annual hospital survey database, and the hospital market Herfindahl-Hirschman index was used to categorize hospitals into low- and high-concentration markets. Multi-level, multivariable regression models adjusting for patient characteristics (i.e., age, sex, comorbidities, and social vulnerability), year of procedure, and hospital factors (i.e., case volume, nurse-bed ratio, and teaching status) were used to assess the association between hospital market competition and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 117,641 beneficiaries who underwent complex oncologic surgery, the mean age was 73.8 ± 6.1 years, and approximately one-half of the cohort was male (n = 56,243, 47.8%). Overall, 63.8% (n = 75,041) of the patients underwent care within a high-competition market. Notably, there was marked geographic variation relative to market competition. High versus low market-competition hospitals were more likely to be in high social vulnerability areas (35.1 vs 27.5%; p < 0.001), as well as care for racial/ethnic minority individuals (13.8 vs 7.7%; p < 0.001), and patients with more comorbidities (≥ 2 Elixhauser comorbidities: 63.1 vs 61.1%; p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, treatment at hospitals in high- versus low-competition markets was associated with lower odds of achieving a textbook outcome (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-0.99; p = 0.009). Patients at high-competition hospitals had greater mean index hospitalization costs ($19,462.2 [16211.9] vs $18,844.7 [14994.7]) and 90-day post-discharge costs ($7807.8 [15431.3] vs $7332.8 [14038.2]) (both p < 0.001) than individuals at low-competition hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital market competition was associated with poor achievement of an optimal postoperative outcome and greater hospitalization costs.
Assuntos
Competição Econômica , Neoplasias , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Estados Unidos , Neoplasias/cirurgia , Neoplasias/economia , Seguimentos , Medicare/economia , Prognóstico , Hospitais/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou maisRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: We sought to define the individual contributions of patient characteristics (PCs), hospital characteristics (HCs), case volume (CV), and social determinants of health (SDoH) on in-hospital mortality (IHM) after complex cancer surgery. METHODS: The California Department of Health Care Access and Information database identified patients who underwent esophagectomy (ES), pneumonectomy (PN), pancreatectomy (PD), or proctectomy (PR) for a malignant diagnosis between 2010 and 2020. Multi-level multivariable regression was performed to assess the proportion of variance explained by PCs, HCs, CV and SDoH on IHM. RESULTS: A total of 52,838 patients underwent cancer surgery (ES: n = 2,700, 5.1%; PN: n = 30,822, 58.3%; PD: n = 7530, 14.3%; PR: n = 11,786, 22.3%) across 294 hospitals. The IHM for the overall cohort was 1.7% and varied from 4.4% for ES to 0.8% for PR. On multivariable regression, PCs contributed the most to the variance in IHM (overall: 32.0%; ES: 21.6%; PN: 28.0%; PD: 20.3%; PR: 39.9%). Among the overall cohort, CV contributed 2.4%, HCs contributed 1.3%, and SDoH contributed 1.2% to the variation in IHM. CV was the second highest contributor to IHM among ES (5.3%), PN (5.3%), and PD (5.9%); however, HCs were a more important contributor among patients who underwent PR (8.0%). The unexplained variance in IHM was highest among ES (72.4%), followed by the PD (67.5%) and PN (64.6%) patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: PCs are the greatest underlying contributor to variations in IHM following cancer surgery. These data highlight the need to focus on optimizing patients and exploring unexplained sources of IHM to improve quality of surgical care.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Determinantes Sociais da Saúde , Humanos , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Pneumonectomia , Hospitais , Neoplasias/cirurgiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Primary care (PC) is essential to overall wellness and management of comorbidities. In turn, patients without adequate access to PC may face healthcare disparities. We sought to characterize the impact of established PC on postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing a surgical procedure for a digestive tract cancer. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries with a diagnosis of hepatobiliary, pancreas, and colorectal cancer between 2005 and 2019 were identified within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program and Medicare-linked database. Individuals who did versus did not have PC encounters within 1-year before surgery were identified. A postoperative textbook outcome (TO) was defined as the absence of complications, no prolonged hospital stay, no readmission within 90 days, and no mortality. RESULTS: Among 63,177 patients, 50,974 (80.7%) had at least one established PC visit before surgery. Patients with established PC were more likely to achieve TO (odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.19) with lower odds for complications (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-0.89), extended hospital stay (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.94), 90-day readmission (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.99), and 90-day mortality (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.96). In addition, patients with established PC had a 4.1% decrease in index costs and a 5.2% decrease in 1-year costs. Notably, patients who had one to five visits with their PC in the year before surgery had improved odds of TO (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.16-1.27), whereas individuals with more than 10 visits had lower odds of a postoperative TO (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.98). CONCLUSION: Most Medicare beneficiaries with digestive tract cancer had established PC within the year before their surgery. Established PC was associated with a higher probability of achieving ideal outcomes and lower costs. In contrast, patients with more than 10 PC appointments, which was likely a surrogate of overall comorbidity burden, experienced no improvement in postoperative outcomes.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted health care delivery, including cancer screening practices. This study sought to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening relative to social vulnerability. METHODS: Using the Medicare Standard Analytic File, individuals 65 years old or older who were eligible for guideline-concordant CRC screening between 2019 and 2021 were identified. These data were merged with the Center for Disease Control Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) dataset. Changes in county-level monthly screening volumes relative to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) and easing of restrictions (March 2021) were assessed relative to SVI. RESULTS: Among 10,503,180 individuals continuously enrolled in Medicare with no prior diagnosis of CRC, 1,362,457 (12.97%) underwent CRC screening between 2019 and 2021. With the COVID-19 pandemic, CRC screening decreased markedly across the United States (median monthly screening: pre-pandemic [n = 76,444] vs pandemic era [n = 60,826]; median Δn = 15,618; p < 0.001). The 1-year post-pandemic overall CRC screening utilization generally rebounded to pre-COVID-19 levels (monthly median screening volumes: pandemic era [n = 60,826] vs post-pandemic [n = 74,170]; median Δn = 13,344; p < 0.001). Individuals residing in counties with the highest SVI experienced a larger decline in CRC screening odds than individuals residing in low-SVI counties (reference, low SVI: pre-pandemic high SVI [OR, 0.85] vs pandemic high SVI [OR, 0.81] vs post-pandemic high SVI [OR, 0.85]; all p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a decrease in CRC screening volumes. Patients who resided in high social vulnerability areas experienced the greatest pandemic-related decline.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Humanos , Idoso , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis , Etnicidade , Medicare , Pandemias , Vulnerabilidade SocialRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The growing burden of an aging population has raised concerns about demands on healthcare systems and resources, particularly in the context of surgical and cancer care. Delirium can affect treatment outcomes and patient recovery. We sought to determine the prevalence of postoperative delirium among patients undergoing digestive tract surgery for malignant indications and to analyze the role of delirium on surgical outcomes. METHODS: Medicare claims data were queried to identify patients diagnosed with esophageal, gastric, hepatobiliary, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers between 2018 and 2021. Postoperative delirium, occurring within 30 days of operation, was identified via International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition codes. Clinical outcomes of interested included "ideal" textbook outcome (TO), characterized as the absence of complications, an extended hospital stay, readmission within 90 days, or mortality within 90 days. Discharge disposition, intensive care unit (ICU) utilization, and expenditures also were examined. RESULTS: Among 115,654 cancer patients (esophageal: n = 1854, 1.6%; gastric: n = 4690, 4.1%; hepatobiliary: n = 6873, 5.9%; pancreatic: n = 8912, 7.7%; colorectal: n = 93,325, 90.7%), 2831 (2.4%) were diagnosed with delirium within 30 days after surgery. On multivariable analysis, patients with delirium were less likely to achieve TO (OR 0.27 [95% CI 0.25-0.30]). In particular, patients who experienced delirium had higher odds of complications (OR 3.00 [2.76-3.25]), prolonged length of stay (OR 3.46 [3.18-3.76]), 90-day readmission (OR 1.96 [1.81-2.12]), and 90-day mortality (OR 2.78 [2.51-3.08]). Furthermore, patients with delirium had higher ICU utilization (OR 2.85 [2.62-3.11]). Upon discharge, patients with delirium had a decreased likelihood of being sent home (OR 0.40 [0.36-0.46]) and instead were more likely to be transferred to a skilled nursing facility (OR 2.17 [1.94-2.44]). Due to increased utilization of hospital resources, patients with delirium incurred in-hospital expenditures that were 55.4% higher (no delirium: $16,284 vs. delirium: $28,742) and 90-day expenditures that were 100.7% higher (no delirium: $2564 vs. delirium: $8226) (both p < 0.001). Notably, 3-year postoperative survival was adversely affected by delirium (no delirium: 55.5% vs. delirium: 37.3%), even after adjusting risk for confounding factors (HR 1.79 [1.70-1.90]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative delirium occurred in one in 50 patients undergoing surgical resection of a digestive tract cancer. Delirium was linked to a reduced likelihood of achieving an optimal postoperative outcome, increased ICU utilization, higher expenditures, and a worse long-term prognosis. Initiatives to prevent delirium are vital to improve postoperative outcomes among cancer surgery patients.
Assuntos
Delírio , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos do Sistema Digestório , Tempo de Internação , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Humanos , Masculino , Delírio/etiologia , Delírio/epidemiologia , Feminino , Idoso , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos do Sistema Digestório/efeitos adversos , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Seguimentos , Prognóstico , Taxa de Sobrevida , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , MedicareRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mental health has an important role in the care of cancer patients, and access to mental health services may be associated with improved outcomes. Thus, poor access to psychiatric services may contribute to suboptimal cancer treatment. We conducted a geospatial analysis to characterize psychiatrist distribution and assess the impact of mental healthcare shortages with surgical outcomes among patients with gastrointestinal cancer. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries with mental illness diagnosed with complex gastrointestinal cancers between 2004 and 2016 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare registry. National Provider Identifier-registered psychiatrist locations were mapped and linked to SEER-Medicare records. Regional access to psychiatric services was assessed relative to textbook outcome, a composite assessment of postoperative complications, prolonged length of stay, 90-day readmission and mortality. RESULTS: Among 15,714 patients with mental illness and gastrointestinal cancer, 3937 were classified as having high access to psychiatric services while 3910 had low access. On multivariable logistic regression, areas with low access had higher risk of worse postoperative outcomes. Specifically, individuals residing in areas with low access had increased odds of prolonged length of stay (OR 1.11, 95%CI 1.01-1.22; p = 0.028) and 90-day readmission (OR 1.19, 95%CI 1.08-1.31; p < 0.001), as well as decreased odds of textbook outcome (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.77-0.93; p < 0.001) and discharge to home (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.80-0.99; p = 0.028). CONCLUSION: Patients with mental illness and lower access to psychiatric services had worse postoperative outcomes. Policymakers and providers should prioritize incorporating mental health screening and access to psychiatric services to address disparities among patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.
Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos do Sistema Digestório , Neoplasias Gastrointestinais , Serviços de Saúde Mental , Humanos , Idoso , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Medicare , Modelos Logísticos , Neoplasias Gastrointestinais/cirurgia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: New persistent opioid use (NPOU) after surgery has been identified as a common complication. This study sought to assess the long-term health outcomes among patients who experienced NPOU after gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for hepato-pancreato-biliary and colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2019 were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database. Mixed-effect multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk of mortality and hospital visits related to falls, respiratory events, or pain symptoms. RESULTS: Among 15,456 patients who underwent GI cancer surgery, 967(6.6%) experienced NPOU. Notably, the patients at risk for the development of NPOU were those with a history of substance abuse (odds ratio [OR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.84), moderate social vulnerability (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06-1.50), an advanced disease stage (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 3.51-5.82), or perioperative opioid use (OR, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.59-3.63. After control for competing risk factors, patients who experienced NPOU were more likely to visit a hospital for falls, respiratory events, or pain symptoms (OR, 1.45, 95% CI 1.18-1.78). Moreover, patients who experienced NPOU had a greater risk of death at 1 year (hazard ratio [HR], 2.15; 95% CI, 1.74-2.66). CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 15 patients experienced NPOU after GI cancer surgery. NPOU was associated with an increased risk of subsequent hospital visits and higher mortality. Targeted interventions for individuals at higher risk for NPOU after surgery should be used to help mitigate the harmful effects of NPOU.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Neoplasias Gastrointestinais , Programa de SEER , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Seguimentos , Neoplasias Gastrointestinais/cirurgia , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Taxa de Sobrevida , Prognóstico , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/epidemiologia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos do Sistema Digestório/efeitos adversos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Fatores de Risco , Complicações Pós-OperatóriasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Food insecurity predisposes individuals to suboptimal nutrition, leading to chronic disease and poor outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the impact of county-level food insecurity on colorectal surgical outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was merged with county-level food insecurity obtained from the Feeding America: Mapping the Meal Gap report. Multiple logistic and Cox regression adjusted for patient-level covariates were implemented to assess outcomes. PATIENTS: Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 2010 and 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical admission type (nonelective and elective admission), any complication, extended length of stay, discharge disposition (discharged to home and nonhome discharge), 90-day readmission, 90-day mortality, and textbook outcome. Textbook outcome was defined as no extended length of stay, postoperative complications, 90-day readmission, and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Among 72,354 patients with colorectal cancer, 46,296 underwent resection. Within the surgical cohort, 9091 (19.3%) were in low, 27,716 (59.9%) were in moderate, and 9,489 (20.5%) were in high food insecurity counties. High food insecurity patients had greater odds of nonelective surgery (OR: 1.17; 95% CI, 1.09-1.26; p < 0.001), 90-day readmission (OR: 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.19; p = 0.002), extended length of stay (OR: 1.32; 95% CI, 1.21-1.44; p < 0.001), and complications (OR: 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19; p = 0.002). High food insecurity patients also had decreased odds of home discharge (OR: 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91; p < 0.001) and textbook outcomes (OR: 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75-0.87; p < 0.001). High food insecurity minority patients had increased odds of complications (OR 1.59; 95% CI, 1.43-1.78) and extended length of stay (OR 1.89; 95% CI, 1.69-2.12) compared with low food insecurity white patients (all, p < 0.001). Notably, high food insecurity minority patients had 31% lower odds of textbook outcomes (OR: 0.69; 95% CI, 0.62-0.76; p < 0.001) compared with low food insecurity White patients ( p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited to Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older; hence, it may not be generalizable to younger populations or those without insurance or with private insurance. CONCLUSIONS: County-level food insecurity was associated with suboptimal outcomes, demonstrating the importance of interventions to mitigate these inequities. See Video Abstract. LA ASOCIACIN DE INSEGURIDAD ALIMENTARIA Y RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS ENTRE PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGA DE CNCER COLORRECTAL: ANTECEDENTES:La inseguridad alimentaria predispone a las personas a una nutrición subóptima, lo que conduce a enfermedades crónicas y malos resultados.OBJETIVO:Intentamos evaluar el impacto de la inseguridad alimentaria a nivel de condado en resultados de la cirugía colorrectal.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ENTORNO CLINICO:La base de datos SEER-Medicare fusionada con la inseguridad alimentaria a nivel de condado obtenida del informe Feeding America: Mapping the Meal Gap. Para evaluar los resultados se implementaron regresiones logísticas múltiples y de Cox ajustadas según las covariables a nivel de paciente.PACIENTES:Beneficiarios de Medicare diagnosticados con cáncer colorrectal entre 2010 y 2015.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tipo de ingreso quirúrgico (ingreso no electivo y electivo), cualquier complicación, duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria, disposición del alta (alta al domicilio y alta no domiciliaria), reingreso a los 90 días, mortalidad a los 90 días y resultado del libro de texto. El resultado de los libros de texto se definió como ausencia de estancia hospitalaria prolongada, complicaciones postoperatorias, reingreso a los 90 días y mortalidad a los 90 días.RESULTADOS:Entre 72.354 pacientes con cáncer colorrectal, 46.296 se sometieron a resección. Dentro de la cohorte quirúrgica, 9.091 (19,3%) tenían inseguridad alimentaria baja, 27.716 (59,9%) eran moderadas y 9.489 (20,5%) tenían inseguridad alimentaria alta. Los pacientes con alta inseguridad alimentaria tuvieron mayores probabilidades de cirugía no electiva (OR: 1,17, IC 95%: 1,09-1,26, p <0,001), reingreso a los 90 días (OR: 1,11, IC95%: 1,04-1,19, p = 0,002), duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria (OR: 1,32; IC95%: 1,21-1,44, p < 0,001) y complicaciones (OR: 1,11; IC95%: 1,03-1,19, p = 0,002). Los pacientes con alta inseguridad alimentaria también tuvieron menores probabilidades de ser dados de alta a domicilio (OR: 0,85, IC del 95%: 0,79-0,91, p <0,001) y resultados de los libros de texto (OR: 0,81, IC del 95%: 0,75-0,87, p <0,001). Los pacientes minoritarios con alta inseguridad alimentaria tuvieron mayores probabilidades de complicaciones (OR 1,59, IC 95%, 1,43-1,78) y duración prolongada de la estadía (OR 1,89, IC 95%, 1,69-2,12) en comparación con los individuos blancos con baja inseguridad alimentaria (todos, p < 0,001). En particular, los pacientes minoritarios con alta inseguridad alimentaria tenían un 31% menos de probabilidades de obtener resultados según los libros de texto (OR: 0,69, IC del 95%, 0,62-0,76, p <0,001) en comparación con los pacientes blancos con baja inseguridad alimentaria ( p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:Limitado a beneficiarios de Medicare mayores de 65 años, por lo tanto, puede no ser generalizable a poblaciones más jóvenes o a aquellos sin seguro o con seguro privado.CONCLUSIONES:La inseguridad alimentaria a nivel de condado se asoció con resultados subóptimos, lo que demuestra la importancia de las intervenciones para mitigar estas desigualdades. (Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).
Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais , Medicare , Humanos , Idoso , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tempo de Internação , Resultado do Tratamento , Neoplasias Colorretais/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/cirurgia , Insegurança Alimentar , Readmissão do PacienteRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Social determinants of health can play an important role in patient health. Privilege is a right, benefit, advantage, or opportunity that can positively affect all social determinants of health. We sought to assess variations in the prevalence of privilege among patient populations and define the association of privilege on postoperative surgical outcomes. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries who underwent elective coronary artery bypass grafting, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, colectomy, and lung resection were identified. The Index of Concentration of Extremes (ICE), a validated metric of both social spatial polarization and privilege was calculated and merged with county-level data obtained from the American Community Survey. Textbook outcome (TO) was defined as absence of postoperative complications, extended length of stay, 90-day mortality, and 90-day readmission. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between ICE and TO. RESULTS: Among 1,885,889 Medicare beneficiaries who met inclusion criteria, 655,980 (34.8%) individuals resided in areas with the highest privilege (i.e., White, high-income homogeneity), whereas 221,314 (11.7%) individuals resided in areas of the lowest privilege (i.e., Black, low-income homogeneity). The overall incidence of TO was 66.2% (n = 1,247,558). On multivariable regression, residence in the most advantaged neighbourhoods was associated with a lower chance of surgical complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.91), a prolonged length of stay (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.79-82), 90-day readmission (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92-0.95), and 90-day mortality (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.68-0.74) (all P < 0.001). Residence in the most privileged areas was associated with 19% increased odds of achieving TO (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.18-1.21), as well as a 6% reduction in Medicare expenditures versus individuals in the least privileged counties (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.94-0.94) (both P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Privilege, based on the ICE joint measure of racial/ethnic and economic spatial concentration, was strongly associated with the likelihood to achieve an "optimal" TO following surgery. As healthcare is a basic human right, privilege should not be associated with disparities in surgical care.
Assuntos
Medicare , Grupos Raciais , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Renda , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , PobrezaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Environmental hazards may influence health outcomes and be a driver of health inequalities. We sought to characterize the extent to which social-environmental inequalities were associated with surgical outcomes following a complex operation. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, patients who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, coronary artery bypass grafting, colectomy, pneumonectomy, or pancreatectomy between 2016 and 2021 were identified from Medicare claims data. Patient data were linked with social-environmental data sourced from Centers for Disease Control and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry data based on county of residence. The Environmental Justice Index social-environmental ranking (SER) was used as a measure of environmental injustice. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between SER and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1,052,040 Medicare beneficiaries, 346,410 (32.9%) individuals lived in counties with low SER, while 357,564 (33.9%) lived in counties with high SER. Patients experiencing greater social-environmental injustice were less likely to achieve textbook outcome (odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.94-0.96, P < 0.001) and to be discharged to an intermediate care facility or home with a health agency (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.96-0.98, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative social and environmental inequalities, as captured by the Environmental Justice Index SER, were associated with postoperative outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing a range of surgical procedures. Policy makers should focus on environmental, as well as socioeconomic injustice to address preventable health disparities.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Over the last decade there has been a surge in overdose deaths due to the opioid crisis. We sought to characterize the temporal change in overdose donor (OD) use in liver transplantation (LT), as well as associated post-LT outcomes, relative to the COVID-19 era. METHODS: LT candidates and donors listed between January 2016 and September 2022 were identified from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. Trends in LT donors and changes related to OD were assessed pre- versus post-COVID-19 (February 2020). RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2022, most counties in the United States experienced an increase in overdose-related deaths (n = 1284, 92.3%) with many counties (n = 458, 32.9%) having more than a doubling in drug overdose deaths. Concurrently, there was an 11.2% increase in overall donors, including a 41.7% increase in the number of donors who died from drug overdose. In pre-COVID-19 overdose was the 4th top mechanism of donor death, while in the post-COVID-19 era, overdose was the 2nd most common cause of donor death. OD was younger (OD: 35 yrs, IQR 29-43 vs. non-OD: 43 yrs, IQR 31-56), had lower body mass index (≥35 kg/cm2, OD: 31.2% vs. non-OD: 33.5%), and was more likely to be HCV+ (OD: 28.9% vs. non-OD: 5.4%) with lower total bilirubin (≥1.1 mg/dL, OD: 12.9% vs. non-OD: 20.1%) (all p < .001). Receipt of an OD was not associated with worse graft survival (HR .94, 95% CI .88-1.01, p = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid deaths markedly increased following the COVID-19 pandemic, substantially altering the LT donor pool in the United States.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Overdose de Drogas , Transplante de Fígado , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Epidemia de Opioides , Pandemias , Doadores de Tecidos , COVID-19/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We sought to examine the association between primary care physician (PCP) follow-up on readmission following gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for GI cancer were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariable regression was performed to examine the association between early PCP follow-up and hospital readmission. RESULTS: Among 60 957 patients who underwent GI cancer surgery, 19 661 (32.7%) visited a PCP within 30-days after discharge. Of note, patients who visited PCP were less likely to be readmitted within 90 days (PCP visit: 17.4% vs. no PCP visit: 28.2%; p < 0.001). Median postsurgical expenditures were lower among patients who visited a PCP (PCP visit: $4116 [IQR: $670-$13 860] vs. no PCP visit: $6700 [IQR: $870-$21 301]; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, PCP follow-up was associated with lower odds of 90-day readmission (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.50-0.55) (both p < 0.001). Moreover, patients who followed up with a PCP had lower risk of death at 90-days (HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.40-0.51; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: PCP follow-up was associated with a reduced risk of readmission and mortality following GI cancer surgery. Care coordination across in-hospital and community-based health platforms is critical to achieve optimal outcomes for patients.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Gastrointestinais , Readmissão do Paciente , Médicos de Atenção Primária , Programa de SEER , Humanos , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Readmissão do Paciente/economia , Masculino , Feminino , Neoplasias Gastrointestinais/cirurgia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Seguimentos , Médicos de Atenção Primária/estatística & dados numéricos , Assistência ao Convalescente/estatística & dados numéricos , Assistência ao Convalescente/economia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos do Sistema DigestórioRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We sought to define surgical outcomes among elderly patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) following major thoracic and gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was used to identify patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, pneumonectomy, pancreatectomy, and colectomy. Individuals were identified from the Medicare Standard Analytic Files and multivariable regression was utilized to assess the association of ADRD with textbook outcome (TO), expenditures, and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Among 1,175,010 Medicare beneficiaries, 19,406 (1.7%) patients had a preoperative diagnosis of ADRD (CABG: n = 1,643, 8.5%; AAA repair: n = 5,926, 30.5%; pneumonectomy: n = 590, 3.0%; pancreatectomy: n = 181, 0.9%; and colectomy: n = 11,066, 57.0%). After propensity score matching, patients with ADRD were less likely to achieve a TO (ADRD: 31.2% vs. no ADRD: 40.1%) or be discharged to home (ADRD: 26.7% vs. no ADRD: 46.2%) versus patients who did not have ADRD (both p < 0.001). Median index surgery expenditures were higher among patients with ADRD (ADRD: $28,815 [IQR $14,333-$39,273] vs. no ADRD: $27,101 [IQR $13,433-$38,578]; p < 0.001) (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients with ADRD had higher odds of postoperative complications (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.25-1.40), extended length-of-stay (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.21-1.32), 90-day readmission (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.31-1.43), and 90-day mortality (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.66-1.86) (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative diagnosis of ADRD was an independent risk factor for poor postoperative outcomes, discharge to non-home settings, as well as higher healthcare expenditures. These data should serve to inform discussions and decision-making about surgery among the growing number of older patients with cognitive deficits.
Assuntos
Demência , Gastos em Saúde , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso , Gastos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Demência/economia , Estados Unidos , Medicare/economia , Resultado do Tratamento , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/economia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Pontuação de Propensão , Doença de Alzheimer/economia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos do Sistema Digestório/economiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Access to healthcare providers is a key factor in reducing cancer incidence and mortality, underscoring the significance of provider density as a crucial metric of health quality. We sought to characterize the association of provider density on hepatobiliary cancer population-level incidence and mortality. STUDY DESIGN: County-level hepatobiliary cancer incidence and mortality data from 2016 to 2020 and provider data from 2016 to 2018 were obtained from the CDC and Area Health Resource File. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to evaluate the relationship between provider density and hepatobiliary cancer incidence and mortality. RESULTS: Among 1359 counties, 851 (62.6%) and 508 (37.4%) counties were categorized as urban and rural, respectively. The median number of providers in any given county was 104 (IQR: 44-306), while provider density was 120.1 (IQR: 86.7-172.2) per 100,000 population; median household income was $51,928 (IQR: $45,050-$61,655). Low provider-density counties were more likely to have a greater proportion of residents over 65 years of age (52.7% vs. 49.6%) who were uninsured (17.4% vs. 13.2%) versus higher provider-density counties (p < 0.05). Moreover, all-stage incidence, late-stage incidence, and mortality rates were higher in counties with low provider density. On multivariable analysis, moderate, and high provider density were associated with lower odds of all-stage incidence, late-stage incidence, and mortality. CONCLUSION: Higher county-level provider density was associated with lower hepatobiliary cancer-related incidence and mortality. Efforts to increase access to healthcare providers may improve healthcare equity as well as long-term cancer outcomes.