Emergency Department Trauma Activation Fees by Payer Type.

This cross-sectional study examines the wide variations in prices of emergency medical services at US hospitals.

Dollars and Sense: The Financial Argument for Dedicated Posttrauma Center Care.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that the creation of a Center for Trauma Survivorship (CTS) is not cost-prohibitive but is a revenue generator for the institution. BACKGROUND: A dedicated CTS has been demonstrated to increase adherence with follow-up visits and improve overall aftercare in severely injured patients discharged from the trauma center. A potential impediment to the creation of similar centers is its assumed prohibitive cost. METHODS: This pre and post-cohort study examines the financial impact of patients treated by the CTS. Patients in the PRE cohort were those treated in the year before CTS inception. Eligibility criteria are trauma patients admitted who are ≥18 years of age and have a New Injury Severity Score ≥16 or intensive care unit stay ≥2 days. Financial data were obtained from the hospital's billing and cost accounting systems for a 1-year time period after discharge. RESULTS: There were 176 patients in the PRE and 256 in the CTS cohort. The CTS cohort generated 1623 subsequent visits versus 748 in the PRE cohort. CTS patients underwent more follow-up surgery in their first year of recovery as compared with the PRE cohort (98 vs 26 procedures). Each CTS patient was responsible for a $7752 increase in net revenue with a positive contribution margin of $4558 compared with those in the PRE group. CONCLUSIONS: A dedicated CTS increases subsequent visits and necessary procedures and is a positive revenue source for the trauma center. The presumptive financial burden of a CTS is incorrect and the creation of dedicated centers will improve patients' outcomes and the institution's bottom line.

Predictors of Episode-of-Care Costs for Ankle Fractures.

Ankle fractures are one of the most resource-consuming traumatic orthopedic injuries. Few studies have successfully evaluated the episode-of-care costs (EOCC) of common traumatic orthopedic injuries. The objective of this study was to determine the EOCC associated with the surgical management of ankle fractures. A retrospective cohort study of 105 consecutive patients who underwent open reduction internal fixation of an isolated ankle fracture at a Canadian Level-1 trauma center was conducted. Episode-of-care costs were generated using an activity-based costing framework. The median global episode-of-care cost for ankle fracture surgeries performed at the studied institution was $3,487 CAD [IQR 880] ($2,685 USD [IQR 616]). Patients aged 60 to 90 years had a significantly higher median EOCC than younger patients (p = .01). Supination-adduction injuries had a significantly higher median EOCC than other injury patterns (p = .01). The median EOCC for patients who underwent surgery within 10 days of their injury ($3,347 CAD [582], $2,577 USD [448]) was significantly lower than the cost for patients who had their surgery delayed 10 days or more after the injury ($3,634 CAD [776], $2,798 USD [598]) (p = .03). Patient sex, anesthesia type, ASA score and surgeon's fellowship training did not affect the EOCC. This study provides valuable data on predictors of EOCC in the surgical management of ankle fractures. Delaying simple ankle fracture cases due to operating time constraints can increase the total cost and burden of these fractures on the healthcare system. In addition, this study provides a framework for future episode-of-care cost analysis studies in orthopedic surgery.

A pilot project of a Post Discharge Care Team for firearm injury survivors decreases emergency department utilization, hospital readmission days, and cost.

BACKGROUND: Persons of low socioeconomic status are overrepresented in the firearm injury patient population and may experience challenges in accessing complex outpatient health systems. Consequently, outpatient care for these patients is plagued by poor follow-up and increased emergency department (ED) utilization. We developed a Post Discharge Care Team (PDCT) consisting of a dedicated trauma nurse navigator and medical social worker to bridge the gap between hospital discharge and outpatient care to improve recovery. METHODS: Adult firearm injury survivors admitted to the trauma service were randomized 1:1 to receive either PDCT services or standard of care (SOC) workflows. The PDCT nurse provided education and set expectations regarding injuries, wound care, and outpatient follow-up. The PDCT social worker performed a comprehensive assessment to identify concerns including housing and financial instability, food insecurity, or transportation issues. The primary outcome was ED utilization, with secondary outcomes including readmissions and overall health care costs compared between groups. RESULTS: In the first 6 months of the study, a total of 44 patients were randomized to PDCT and 47 to SOC. There were 10 patients who visited the ED in the PDCT group compared with 16 in the SOC group ( p = 0.23) for a total of 14 and 23 ED visits, respectively. There were 14 patients in the PDCT and 11 patients in the SOC groups who were readmitted ( p = 0.31), but the PDCT group was readmitted for 27.9 fewer hospital days. After accounting for programmatic costs, the PDCT had a hospital savings of $34,542.71. CONCLUSION: A collaborative, specialized PDCT for firearm injury survivors consisting of a dedicated trauma nurse navigator and medical social worker decreased outpatient ED utilization, readmission days, and was cost effective. Trauma centers with high volumes of penetrating trauma should consider a similar model to improve outpatient care for firearm injury survivors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

The invisible scars: Unseen financial complications worsen every aspect of long-term health in trauma survivors.

BACKGROUND: Trauma survivors are susceptible to experiencing financial toxicity (FT). Studies have shown the negative impact of FT on chronic illness outcomes. However, there is a notable lack of data on FT in the context of trauma. We aimed to better understand prevalence, risk factors, and impact of FT on trauma long-term outcomes. METHODS: Adult trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥9 treated at Level I trauma centers were interviewed 6 months to 14 months after discharge. Financial toxicity was considered positive if patients reported any of the following due to the injury: income loss, lack of care, newly applied/qualified for governmental assistance, new financial problems, or work loss. The Impact of FT on Patient Reported Outcome Measure Index System (PROMIS) health domains was investigated. RESULTS: Of 577 total patients, 44% (254/567) suffered some form of FT. In the adjusted model, older age (odds ratio [OR], 0.4; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.2-0.81) and stronger social support networks (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.74) were protective against FT. In contrast, having two or more comorbidities (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.01-3.28), lower education levels (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 95%, 1.26-3.03), and injury mechanisms, including road accidents (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.51-4.77) and intentional injuries (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 1.44-12.86) were associated with higher toxicity. No significant relationship was found with ISS, sex, or single-family household. Patients with FT had worse outcomes across all domains of health. There was a negative linear relationship between the severity of FT and worse mental and physical health scores. CONCLUSION: Financial toxicity is associated with long-term outcomes. Incorporating FT risk assessment into recovery care planning may help to identify patients most in need of mitigative interventions across the trauma care continuum to improve trauma recovery. Further investigations to better understand, define, and address FT in trauma care are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Charges, length of stay, and complication associations with trauma center ownership in adult patients with mild to moderate trauma.

BACKGROUND: For-profit (FP) trauma centers (TCs) charge more for trauma care than not-for-profit (NFP) centers. We sought to determine charges, length of stay (LOS), and complications associations with TC ownership status (FP, NFP, and government) for three diagnoses among patients with overall low injury severity. METHODS: Adult patients treated at TCs with an International Classification of Diseases-based injury severity score (ICISS) survival probability ≥ 0.85 were identified. Only those who with a principal diagnosis of femur, tibial or rib fractures were included. RESULTS: Total charges were significantly higher at FP centers than NFP and lower at government centers (89.6% and -12.8%, respectively). FP TCs had a 12.5% longer LOS and government TCs had a 20.4% longer LOS than NFP TCs. CONCLUSION: Patients presenting to FP TCs with mild/moderate femur, tibial, or rib fractures experienced higher charges and increased LOS compared with government or NFP centers. There was no difference in overall complication rates.

Three months in a high-volume tertiary orthopaedic trauma unit: What is a registrar worth?

BACKGROUND: South Africa has a high burden of traumatic injuries that is predominantly managed in the public healthcare system, despite the relative disparity in human resources between the public and private sectors. Because of budget and theatre time constraints, the trauma waiting list often exceeds 50 - 60 patients who need urgent and emergent surgery in high-volume orthopaedic trauma centres. This situation is exacerbated by other surgical disciplines using orthopaedic theatre time for life-threatening injuries because of lack of own theatre availability. One of the proposed solutions to this problem is outsourcing of some of the cases to private medical facilities. OBJECTIVES: To establish the volume of work done by an orthopaedic registrar during a 3-month trauma rotation, and to calculate the implant and theatre costs, as well as compare the salary of a registrar with the theoretical private surgeon fees for procedures performed by the registrar in the 3-month period. METHODS: In a retrospective study, the surgical logbook of a single registrar during a 3-month rotation, from 14 January to 14 April 2019, was reviewed. Surgeon fees were calculated for these procedures, according to current medical aid rates, without additional modifier codes being added. RESULTS: During the 3-month study period, a total of 157 surgical procedures was performed, ranging from total hip arthroplasty to debridement of septic hands. Surgeon fees amounted to ZAR186 565.10 per month ‒ double the gross salary of a registrar. Total implant costs amounted to ZAR1 272 667. Theatre costs were ZAR1 301 976 for the 3-month period. CONCLUSIONS: Although this analysis was conducted over a short period, it highlights the significant amount of trauma work done by a single individual at a high-volume tertiary orthopaedic trauma unit. With increasing budget constraints, pressure on theatre time and a growing population, cost-effective expansion of resources is needed. From this study, it appears that increasing capacity in the state sector could be cheaper than private outsourcing, although a more in-depth analysis needs to be conducted.

Futile trauma transfers: An infrequent but costly component of regionalized trauma care.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate interfacility transfers are a key component of highly functioning trauma systems but transfer of unsalvageable patients can overburden the resources of higher-level centers. We sought to identify the occurrence and associated reasons for futile transfers within our trauma system. METHODS: Using prospectively collected data from our system database, a retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify patients who underwent interfacility transfer to our American College of Surgeons level I center. Adult patients from June 2017 to June 2019 who died, had comfort measures implemented, were discharged, or went to hospice care within 48 hours of admission without significant operation, procedure, or radiologic intervention were examined. Futility was defined as resulting in death or hospice discharge within 48 hours of transfer without major operative, endoscopic, or radiologic intervention. RESULTS: A total of 1,241 patients transferred to our facility during the study period. Four hundred seven patients had a length of stay less than or equal to 48 hours. Eighteen (1.5%) met the criteria for futility. The most common reason for transfer in the futile population was traumatic brain injury (56%) and need for neurosurgical capabilities (62%). Futile patients had a median age and Injury Severity Score of 75 and 21. The main transportation method was ground 9 (50%) with 8 (44.4%) being transported by helicopter and 1 (5.6%) being transported by both. Combining transport costs with hospital charges, each futile transfer was estimated to cost US $56,396 (interquartile range, 41,889-106,393) with a total cost exceeding US $1.7 million. With an estimated 33,000 interfacility transfers annually for trauma in the United States, the cost of futile transfers to the American trauma system would exceed 27 million dollars each year. CONCLUSION: Futile transfers represent a small but costly portion transfer volume. Identification of patients whose conditions preclude the benefit of transfer due to futility and development of appropriate support for referral will significantly improve appropriate allocation of health care resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic; Care management, level IV.

Trends in utilization of whole-body computed tomography in blunt trauma after MVC: Analysis of the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database.

BACKGROUND: The use of whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) in awake, clinically stable injured patients is controversial. It is associated with unnecessary radiation exposure and increased cost. We evaluate use of computed tomography (CT) imaging during the initial evaluation of injured patients at American College of Surgeons Levels I and II trauma centers (TCs) after blunt trauma. METHODS: We identified adult blunt trauma patients after motor vehicle crash (MVC) from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) database between 2007 and 2016 at Level I or II TCs. We defined awake clinically stable patients as those with systolic blood pressure of 100 mm Hg or higher with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15. Computed tomography imaging had to have been performed within 2 hours of arrival. Whole-body computed tomography was defined as simultaneous CT of the head, chest and abdomen, and selective CT if only one to two aforementioned regions were imaged. Patients were stratified by Injury Severity Score (ISS). RESULTS: There were 217,870 records for analysis; 131,434 (60.3%) had selective CT, and 86,436 (39.7%) had WBCT. Overall, there was an increasing trend in WBCT utilization over the study period (p < 0.001). In patients with ISS less than 10, WBCT was utilized more commonly at Level II versus Level I TCs in patients discharged from the emergency department (26.9% vs. 18.3%, p < 0.001), which had no surgical procedure(s) (81.4% vs. 80.3%, p < 0.001) and no injury of the head (53.7% vs. 52.4%, p = 0.008) or abdomen (83.8% vs. 82.1%, p = 0.001). The risk-adjusted odds of WBCT was two times higher at Level II TC vs. Level I (odds ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval 1.82-1.94; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Whole-body computed tomography utilization is increasing relative to selective CT. This increasing utilization is highest at Level II TCs in patients with low ISSs, and in patients without associated head or abdominal injury. The findings have implications for quality improvement and cost reduction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, Level IV.

Acquisition of Medicaid at the time of injury: An opportunity for sustainable insurance coverage.

INTRODUCTION: Uninsured trauma patients are at higher risk of mortality, limited access to postdischarge resources, and catastrophic health expenditure. Hospital Presumptive Eligibility (HPE), enacted with the 2014 Affordable Care Act, enables uninsured patients to be screened and acquired emergency Medicaid at the time of hospitalization. We sought to identify factors associated with successful acquisition of HPE insurance at the time of injury, hypothesizing that patients with higher Injury Severity Score (ISS) (ISS >15) would be more likely to be approved for HPE. METHODS: We identified Medicaid and uninsured patients aged 18 to 64 years with a primary trauma diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision) in a large level I trauma center between 2015 and 2019. We combined trauma registry data with review of electronic medical records, to determine our primary outcome, HPE acquisition. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among 2,320 trauma patients, 1,374 (59%) were already enrolled in Medicaid at the time of hospitalization. Among those uninsured at arrival, 386 (40.8%) acquired HPE before discharge, and 560 (59.2%) remained uninsured. Hospital Presumptive Eligibility patients had higher ISS (ISS >15, 14.8% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001), longer median length of stay (2 days [interquartile range, 0-5 days] vs. 0 [0-1] days, p < 0.001), were more frequently admitted as inpatients (64.5% vs. 33.6%, p < 0.001), and discharged to postacute services (11.9% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.001). Patient, hospital, and policy factors contributed to HPE nonapproval. In adjusted analyses, Hispanic ethnicity (vs. non-Hispanic Whites: aOR, 1.58; p = 0.02) and increasing ISS (p ≤ 0.001) were associated with increased likelihood of HPE approval. CONCLUSION: The time of hospitalization due to injury is an underused opportunity for intervention, whereby uninsured patients can acquire sustainable insurance coverage. Opportunities to increase HPE acquisition merit further study nationally across trauma centers. As administrative and trauma registries do not capture information to compare HPE and traditional Medicaid patients, prospective insurance data collection would help to identify targets for intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic, level IV.

Choosing the Best Approach to Warfarin Reversal After Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Patients on warfarin with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage often have the warfarin effects pharmacologically reversed. We compared outcomes among patients who received 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), or no reversal to assess the real-world impact of PCC on elderly patients with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 150 patients on preinjury warfarin. Data were manually abstracted from the electronic medical record of an academic level 1 trauma center for patients admitted between January 2013 and December 2018. Outcomes were ICH progression on follow-up computed tomography scan, mortality, need for surgical intervention, and trends in the use of reversal agents. RESULTS: Of 150 patients eligible for analysis, 41 received FFP, 60 PCC, and 49 were not reversed. On multivariable analysis, patients not reversed [OR 0.25 95% CI (0.31-0.85)] and women [OR 0.38 95% CI (0.17-0.88)] were less likely to experience progression of their initial bleed on follow-up computed tomography while subdural hemorrhage increased the risk [OR 3.69 95% CI (1.27-10.73)]. There was no difference between groups in terms of mortality or need for surgery. Over time use of reversal with PCC increased while use of FFP and not reversing warfarin declined (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Male gender and using a reversal agent were associated with progression of ICH. Choice of reversal did not impact the need for surgery, hospital length of stay, or mortality. Some ICH patients may not require warfarin reversal and may bias studies, especially retrospective studies of warfarin reversal.

Liquid plasma reduces waste and health care expenses compared with thawed plasma at a Level I trauma center.

BACKGROUND: Balanced resuscitation strategies have led to increased utilization of plasma. Fresh frozen plasma that is thawed and never used is a large source of blood component wastage. Thawed plasma (TP) and can only be stored for 5 days. Liquid plasma (LP) has never been frozen and can be stored for 26 days. Due to longer storage duration, we hypothesized that using LP would result in decreased waste and cost savings compared with TP. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all trauma patients at our Level I trauma center in the years 2015 to 2016. We compared 2015 when only TP was used to 2016 when both TP and LP were used. All plasma units ordered for trauma patients were tracked until the time of transfusion or wastage. Wastage rates were compared between years and plasma type. RESULTS: There were 5,789 trauma patients admitted to our institution from 2015 to 2016. There were 4,107 plasma units ordered with 487 (11.9%) units wasted. During 2015, 2,021 total units of plasma were ordered with 273 (13.5%) units wasted which was a significantly higher rate than 2016 when 2,086 total units of plasma were ordered and 214 (10.3%) units were wasted (p = 0.0013). During 2016, 1,739 units of TP were ordered and 204 (11.7%) units were wasted which was significantly higher than LP wastage, 347 units ordered and 10 (2.9%) units wasted (p < 0.001). Of the 477 wasted TP units, 76.9% were ordered no more than two times before being wasted and 95.8% were ordered no more than three times before being wasted. Of the 10 LP units wasted, 40% were ordered no more than two times before being wasted, and 50% were ordered no more than three times before being wasted. If TP was wasted at the same rate as LP, 368 fewer units of plasma would have been wasted representing US $39,376 (US $107/unit) of wasted health care expenses. CONCLUSION: At a Level I trauma center, the addition of LP to the blood bank for trauma resuscitations significantly reduced plasma wastage rates and health care expenses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Economic/Decision.

The cost of gunshot abdominal vascular injuries. Its impact on patient, family and hospital.

BACKGROUND: Violent trauma with penetrating injuries is a relevant public health issue. Penetrating abdominal wounds cause 90-95% of vascular injuries, which not only have high associated morbidity and lethality, but also involve high attention costs. Cost analysis in hospitals has become a topic of great interest, as it justifies changes in hospital organization and management. OBJECTIVE: Determine the cost of gunshot abdominal vascular injuries for the patient, his family and the hospital. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We drove an observational, descriptive, prospective and longitudinal study of patients with of gunshot abdominal vascular injuries admitted in the Mexican Red Cross Trauma Center in the Federal District from January 1st to October 31st, 2018. RESULTS: 8149 patients were admitted in the emergency department, 149 with a diagnosis of gunshot injury, of which 6 (0.07%) had abdominal vascular injury. The total cost of medical care these patients was on average $174,770.79 (median $132,999.50) per capita, amount that surpasses their annual income and implies an institutional absorption of expenditure up to 95.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Institutional investment on the attention of high-impact pathologies and the development of strategies that facilitate access to health services are a real and priority necessity.

ANTECEDENTES: El trauma violento con lesiones penetrantes es un problema de salud pública relevante. Las heridas penetrantes abdominales causan el 90-95% de las lesiones vasculares, las cuales tienen elevada morbilidad asociada y letalidad, e implican elevados costos de atención. El análisis de costos en los hospitales es de gran interés, pues permite justificar cambios en la organización y la gestión hospitalaria. OBJETIVO: Determinar el costo de las lesiones vasculares abdominales por proyectil de arma de fuego para el paciente, su familia y el hospital. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Se llevó a cabo un estudio observacional, descriptivo, prospectivo y longitudinal de pacientes con lesiones vasculares abdominales por proyectil de arma de fuego que ingresaron en el Centro de Trauma de Cruz Roja Mexicana en Ciudad de México entre enero y octubre de 2018. RESULTADOS: Ingresaron 8149 pacientes, 149 con diagnóstico de herida por proyectil de arma de fuego, de los cuales el 0.07% tuvieron lesión vascular abdominal. El costo total de la atención médica fue en promedio de $174,770.79 (mediana $132,999.50) por persona, el cual supera el ingreso anual de esos pacientes e implica una absorción institucional del gasto de hasta el 95.5%. CONCLUSIONES: La inversión institucional en la atención de patologías con alto impacto y el desarrollo de estrategias para facilitar el acceso a servicios de salud son una necesidad prioritaria real.

Catastrophic expenditures in California trauma patients after the Affordable Care Act: reduced financial risk and racial disparities.

BACKGROUND: Hospital charges due to major injury can result in high out-of-pocket expenses for patients. We analyzed the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) among trauma patients. METHODS: We identified trauma patients aged 19-64 admitted to a safety-net Level 1 trauma center in California from 2007 to 2017. Out-of-pocket expenditures and income were calculated using hospital charges, insurance status, and ZIP code. CHE was defined using the World Health Organization definition of out-of-pocket spending exceeding 40% of inflation-adjusted income minus food and housing expenditures. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess odds of CHE post-ACA (2014-2017) vs. pre-ACA (2007-2013). RESULTS: Of 7519 trauma patients, 20.6% experienced CHE, including 89.0% of uninsured patients. There was a 74% decrease in odds of CHE post-ACA (aOR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.22-0.30), with greater decreases among Black (aOR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.04-0.18) and Hispanic (aOR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.19-0.29) patients. CONCLUSIONS: ACA implementation was associated with markedly decreased odds of catastrophic expenditures and decreased racial disparities in financial protection among trauma patients in our study.

Are all trauma centers created equal? Level 1 to level 1 trauma center patient transfers in the setting of rapid trauma center proliferation.

BACKGROUND: Level 1 trauma centers should provide definitive care for every aspect of injury. However, in environments that have experienced trauma center proliferation, not all level 1 centers may have the resources or expertise needed for every patient, necessitating transfer to another trauma center. The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence of such transfers and associated impact on patient outcome and burden on the receiving level 1 center. METHODS: In a metropolitan area experiencing trauma center proliferation, we performed a 5.5-year review of patient transfers to an established level 1 (index center) from other state designated level 1 centers. American College of Surgeons verification level was identified for each facility. Comparisons were performed between the cohort of transferred patients and patients with similar demographics, injury patterns, and severity managed at the index center using propensity score matching. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were received from other state level 1 centers (39% American College of Surgeons level 2, 61% American College of Surgeons level 1). Nearly 70% of patients were transferred for definitive evaluation and/or management of brain, spine, or cerebrovascular injury. For 76% of this subgroup, specialty consultation was available, but the injury was deemed beyond their capability. Comparison of the transfer cohort propensity score matched to the control cohort (93 vs. 558 patients) demonstrated increased length of stay (6.5 days vs. 4.6 days, p = 0.001) and cost (US $36,027 vs. US $30,654, p = 0.033) associated with the transfer cohort, with similar mortality (12.1% vs. 9.7%, p = 0.492). CONCLUSION: The number of level 1 to level 1 transfers observed imply a disparity in resources and capability among level 1 trauma centers in the region. The majority of transfers were for neurosurgical care, suggestive of a deficit of adequate neurosurgical coverage in the setting of trauma center proliferation. Both patients and established trauma centers bear the burden for these transfers with respect to increased cost and length of stay. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, level IV.

Treatment of Facial Fractures at a Level 1 Trauma Center: Do Medicaid and Non-Medicaid Enrollees Receive the Same Care?

BACKGROUND: Timing of surgical treatment of facial fractures may vary with the patient age, injury type, and presence of polytrauma. Previous studies using national data sets have suggested that trauma patients with government insurance experience fewer operations, longer length of hospital stay (LOS), and worse outcomes compared with privately insured patients. The objective of this study is to compare treatment of facial fractures in patients with and without Medicaid insurance (excluding Medicare). METHODS: All adults with mandibular, orbital, and midface fractures at a Level 1 Trauma Center between 2009 and 2018 were included. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the differences in the frequency of surgery, time to surgery (TTS), LOS, and mortality based on insurance type. RESULTS: The sample included 1541 patients with facial fractures (mandible, midface, orbital), of whom 78.8% were male, and 13.1% (208) were enrolled in Medicaid. Mechanism of injury was predominantly assault for Medicaid enrollees and falls or motor vehicle accidents for non-Medicaid enrollees (P < 0.001). Patients with mandible and midface fractures underwent similar rates of surgical repair. Medicaid enrollees with orbital fractures underwent less frequent surgery for facial fractures (24.8% versus 34.7%, P = 0.0443) and had higher rates of alcohol and drug intoxication compared with non-Medicaid enrollees (42.8% versus 31.6%, P = 0.008). TTS, LOS, and mortality were similar in both groups with facial fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the treatment of facial fractures was similar regardless of the insurance type, but Medicaid enrollees with orbital fractures experienced less frequent surgery for facial fractures. Further studies are needed to identify specific socioeconomic and geographic factors contributing to these disparities in care.

Association of Operative Repair Type and Trauma Center Designation With Outcomes in Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) has shown improved outcomes at trauma centers. Whether the benefit of trauma center designation extends to endovascular repair of rAAA is unknown. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development 2007 to 2014 discharge database to identify patients with rAAA. Data included demographic and admission factors, discharge disposition, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes, and hospital characteristics. Hospitals were categorized by trauma center designation and teaching hospital status. The effect of repair type and trauma center designation (level I, level II, or other-other trauma centers and nondesignated hospitals) was evaluated to determine rates and risks of 9 postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, and 30-day postdischarge mortality. RESULTS: Of 1941 rAAA repair patients, 61.2% had open and 37.8% had endovascular; 1.0% had both. Endovascular repair increased over the study interval. Hospitals were 12.0% level I, 25.0% level II, and 63.0% other. A total of 48.7% of hospitals were teaching hospitals (level I, 100%; level II, 42.2%; and other, 41.8%). Endovascular repair was significantly more common at teaching hospitals (41.5% vs 34.3%, P < .001) and was the primary repair method at level I trauma centers (P < .001). Compared with open repair, endovascular repair was protective for most complications and in-hospital mortality. The risk for in-hospital mortality was highest among endovascular patients at level II trauma centers (hazard ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-2.92) and other hospitals (hazard ratio 1.66, 95% CI: 1.01-2.72). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair overall was associated with a lower risk of adverse outcomes. Endovascular repair at level I trauma centers had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality which may be a result of their teaching hospital status, organizational structure, and other factors. The weight of the contributions of such factors warrants further study.

Lifting the burden: State Medicaid expansion reduces financial risk for the injured.

BACKGROUND: Injuries are unanticipated and can be expensive to treat. Patients without sufficient health insurance are at risk for financial strain because of high out-of-pocket (OOP) health care costs relative to their income. We hypothesized that the 2014 Medicaid expansion (ME) in Washington (WA) state, which extended coverage to more than 600,000 WA residents, was associated with a reduction in financial risk among trauma patients. METHODS: We analyzed all trauma patients aged 18 to 64 years admitted to the sole level 1 trauma center in WA from 2012 to 2017. We defined 2012 to 2013 as the prepolicy period and 2014 to 2017 as the postpolicy period. We used a multivariable linear regression model to evaluate for changes in length of stay, inpatient mortality, and discharge disposition. To evaluate for financial strain, we used WA state and US census data to estimate postsubsistence income and OOP expenses for our sample and then applied these two estimates to determine catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) risk as defined by the World Health Organization (OOP health expenses ≥40% of estimated household postsubsistence income). RESULTS: A total of 16,801 trauma patients were included. After ME, the Medicaid coverage rate increased from 20.4% to 41.0%, and the uninsured rate decreased from 19.2% to 3.7% (p < 0.001 for both). There was no significant change in private insurance coverage. Medicaid expansion was not associated with significant changes in clinical outcomes or discharge disposition. Estimated CHE risk by payer was 81.4% for the uninsured, 25.9% for private insurance, and less than 0.1% for Medicaid. After ME, the risk of CHE for the policy-eligible sample fell from 26.4% to 14.0% (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: State ME led to an 80% reduction in the uninsured rate among patients admitted for injury, with an associated large reduction in the risk of CHE. However, privately insured patients were not fully protected from CHE. Additional research is needed to evaluate the impact of these policies on the financial viability of trauma centers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic analysis, level II.