Enhanced Perioperative Care for Major Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: The enhanced perioperative care (EPOC) program is an institutional quality improvement initiative. We used a historically controlled study design to evaluate patients who underwent major spine surgery before and after the implementation of the EPOC program. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether multidisciplinary EPOC program was associated with an improvement in clinical and financial outcomes for elective adult major spine surgery patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs successfully implemented in hip and knee replacement surgeries, and improved clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. METHODS: We compared 183 subjects in traditional care (TRDC) group to 267 intervention period (EPOC) in a single academic quaternary spine surgery referral center. One hundred eight subjects in no pathway (NOPW) care group was also examined to exclude if the observed changes between the EPOC and TRDC groups might be due to concurrent changes in practice or population over the same time period. Our primary outcome variables were hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay and the secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, 30-day hospital readmission and cost. RESULTS: In this highly complex patient population, we observed a reduction in mean hospital length of stay (HLOS) between TRDC versus EPOC groups (8.2 vs. 6.1 d, standard deviation [SD] = 6.3 vs. 3.6, P < 0.001) and intensive care unit length of stay (ILOS) (3.1 vs. 1.9 d, SD = 4.7 vs. 1.4, P = 0.01). The number (rate) of postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admissions was higher for the TRDC n = 109 (60%) than the EPOC n = 129 (48%) (P = 0.02). There was no difference in postoperative complications and 30-day hospital readmissions. The EPOC spine program was associated with significant average cost reduction-$62,429 to $53,355 (P < 0.00). CONCLUSION: The EPOC program has made a clinically relevant contribution to institutional efforts to improve patient outcomes and value. We observed a reduction in HLOS, ILOS, costs, and variability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Assessment of Follow-up Care After Emergency Department Presentation for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Concussion: Results From the TRACK-TBI Study.

Importance: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) affects millions of Americans each year. Lack of consistent clinical practice raises concern that many patients with mTBI may not receive adequate follow-up care. Objective: To characterize the provision of follow-up care to patients with mTBI during the first 3 months after injury. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data on patients with mTBI enrolled in the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) study between February 26, 2014, and August 25, 2016. We examined site-specific variations in follow-up care, the types of clinicians seen by patients receiving follow-up care, and patient and injury characteristics associated with a higher likelihood of receiving follow-up care. The TRACK-TBI study is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational study of patients with TBI presenting to the emergency department of 1 of 11 level I US trauma centers. Study data included patients with head trauma who underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan within 24 hours of injury, had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13 to 15, were aged 17 years or older, and completed follow-up care surveys at 2 weeks and 3 months after injury (N = 831). Main Outcomes and Measures: Follow-up care was defined as hospitals providing TBI educational material at discharge, hospitals calling patients to follow up, and patients seeing a physician or other medical practitioner within 3 months after the injury. Unfavorable outcomes were assessed with the Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire. Results: Of 831 patients (289 [35%] female; 483 [58%] non-Hispanic white; mean [SD] age, 40.3 [16.9] years), less than half self-reported receiving TBI educational material at discharge (353 patients [42%]) or seeing a physician or other health care practitioner within 3 months after injury (367 patients [44%]). Follow-up care varied by study site; adjusting for patient characteristics, the provision of educational material varied from 19% to 72% across sites. Of 236 patients with a positive finding on a CT scan, 92 (39%) had not seen a medical practitioner 3 months after the injury. Adjusting for injury severity and demographics, patient admission to the hospital ward or intensive care unit, patient income, and insurance status were not associated with the probability of seeing a medical practitioner. Among the patients with 3 or more moderate to severe postconcussive symptoms, only 145 of 279 (52%) reported having seen a medical practitioner by 3 months. Conclusions and Relevance: There are gaps in follow-up care for patients with mTBI after hospital discharge, even those with a positive finding on CT or who continue to experience postconcussive symptoms.

Global neurotrauma research challenges and opportunities.

Traumatic injury to the brain or spinal cord is one of the most serious public health problems worldwide. The devastating impact of 'trauma', a term used to define the global burden of disease related to all injuries, is the leading cause of loss of human potential across the globe, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Enormous challenges must be met to significantly advance neurotrauma research around the world, specifically in underserved and austere environments. Neurotrauma research at the global level needs to be contextualized: different regions have their own needs and obstacles. Interventions that are not considered a priority in some regions could be a priority for others. The introduction of inexpensive and innovative interventions, including mobile technologies and e-health applications, focused on policy management improvement are essential and should be applicable to the needs of the local environment. The simple transfer of a clinical question from resource-rich environments to those of low- and middle-income countries that lack sophisticated interventions may not be the best strategy to address these countries' needs. Emphasis on promoting the design of true 'ecological' studies that include the evaluation of human factors in relation to the process of care, analytical descriptions of health systems, and how leadership is best applied in medical communities and society as a whole will become crucial.

Management guided by brain tissue oxygen monitoring and outcome following severe traumatic brain injury.

OBJECT: The authors sought to describe changes in clinical management associated with brain tissue oxygen (PbO(2)) monitoring and how these changes affected outcomes and resource utilization. METHODS: The cohort study comprised 629 patients admitted to a Level I trauma center with a diagnosis of severe traumatic brain injury over a period of 3 years. Hospital mortality rate, neurological outcome, and resource utilization of 123 patients who underwent both PbO(2) and intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring were compared with the same measures in 506 patients who underwent ICP monitoring only. The main outcomes were hospital mortality rate, functional independence at hospital discharge, duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, and hospital cost. Multivariable regression with robust variance was used to estimate the adjusted differences in the main outcome measures between patient groups. The models were adjusted for patient age, severity of injury, and pathological features seen on head CT scan at admission. RESULTS: On average, patients who underwent ICP/PbO(2) monitoring were younger and had more severe injuries than patients who received ICP monitoring alone. Relatively more patients treated with PbO(2) monitoring received osmotic therapy, vasopressors, and prolonged sedation. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, the hospital mortality rate was, if anything, slightly higher in patients undergoing PbO(2)-guided management than in patients monitored with ICP only (adjusted mortality difference 4.4%, 95% CI -3.9 to 13%). Patients who underwent PbO(2)-guided management also had lower adjusted functional independence scores at hospital discharge (adjusted score difference -0.75, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.09). There was a 27% relative increase (95% CI 6-53%) in the median hospital length of stay when the PbO(2) group was compared with the ICP-only group. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate in patients with traumatic brain injury whose clinical management was guided by PbO(2) monitoring was not reduced in comparison with that in patients who received ICP monitoring alone. Brain tissue oxygen monitoring was associated with worse neurological outcome and increased hospital resource utilization.