Health Equity Within Inequity: Timing of Diagnostic Breast Cancer Care in an Underserved Medical Population.

BACKGROUND/AIM: We evaluated timeliness of care at a safety-net hospital after implementation of a multidisciplinary breast program. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective database of patients with breast cancer was created after multidisciplinary breast program initiation in 2018. Patients were tracked to obtain time to completion of diagnostic imaging, biopsy, and treatment initiation. Patients with breast cancer diagnosed from 2015-2017 were reviewed for comparison. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were identified. There was no statistical difference in time to completion of imaging, biopsy, and initial treatment between the 2018 and the 2015-2017 cohorts (p>0.05). No statistical difference was observed in time to completion of imaging, biopsy, and initial treatment between different races (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the same socioeconomic status, there was no differential delivery of screening, work-up, and treatment by race. Despite protocol implementations, efficiency of care remained limited in a safety-net hospital with lack of financial resources.

Is a chest radiograph after thoracostomy tube removal necessary? A cost-effective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following placement of tube thoracostomy (TT) for evacuation of traumatic hemopneumothorax (HPTX), controversy persists over the need for routine post-TT removal chest radiograph (CXR). Current research demonstrates routine CXR may offer no advantage over clinical observation alone while simultaneously increasing hospital resource utilization. As such, we hypothesized that in resolved traumatic HPTXs routine post-TT removal CXR to assess recurrent PTX compared to clinical observation is not cost-effective. METHODS: We performed a decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine CXR compared to clinical observation following TT removal. Our base case was a patient that sustained thoracic trauma with radiographic and clinical resolution of HPTX following TT evacuation. Cost, utility and probability estimates were generated from published literature, with costs represented in 2019 US dollars and utilities in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Decision-analytic model identified that clinical observation after TT removal was the dominant strategy with increased benefit at less cost, when compared to routine CXR, with a net cost of $194.92, QALYs of 0.44. In comparison, routine CXR demonstrated an increase of $821.42 in cost with 0.43 QALYs. On probabilistic sensitivity analysis the clinical observation strategy was found cost-effective in 99.5% of 10,000 iterations. CONCLUSION: In trauma patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of a resolved HPTX, the adoption of clinical observation in lieu of post-TT removal CXR is cost-effective. Routine CXR following TT removal accrues more cost without additional benefit. The practice of routinely obtaining a CXR following TT removal should be scrutinized.

Does Abdominal Seat Belt Sign Warrant Admission After a Negative CT Scan? A Cost-Utility Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Rapid deceleration against a seat belt during a motor vehicle collision (MVC) may result in an abdominal seat belt sign (ASBS), which is associated with a higher risk of hollow viscus injury (HVI). After a negative abdominal CT scan, management of patients with ASBS is variable, but recent evidence suggests emergency department (ED) discharge may be safe. Therefore, we hypothesized that discharge from the ED is cost-effective compared with 23-h observation or hospital admission for patients with ASBS and a negative CT. METHODS: A cost-utility model was developed for an evaluable patient with ASBS and negative CT scan using TreeAge software. ED discharge was compared with 23-h observation and admission. Analysis was from a health care-based third-party payer perspective. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were based on 3-y expected outcomes. Probability and costs were estimated from published literature and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. RESULTS: In our base case, ED discharge was the most cost-effective strategy, yielding a cost of $706 with 2.86 QALYs. The average costs of 23-h observation and hospital admission were $2600 and $8,827, respectively, with 2.87 QALYs gained each. The strategy of ED observation becomes cost-effective when the rate of HVI after ED discharge exceeds 2.3%. In a Monte Carlo simulation, ED discharge was the optimal strategy in 91% of 1000 trials of the model. CONCLUSIONS: ED discharge is a cost-effective strategy for evaluable patients with ASBS and a negative abdominal CT and remains so when the risk of HVI after ED discharge is higher than currently assumed.

Routine Repeat Head CT Does Not Change Management in Trauma Patients on Novel Anticoagulants.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines for imaging anticoagulated patients following a traumatic injury are unclear. Interval CT head (CTH) is often routinely performed after initial negative CTH to assess for delayed intracranial hemorrhage (ICH-d). The rate of ICH-d for patients taking novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is unknown. We hypothesized that the incidence of ICH-d in patients on NOACs would be similar, if not lower to that of warfarin, and routine repeat CTH after initial negative would not change management, and thus, may not be indicated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Anticoagulated patients presenting with blunt trauma to a level I trauma center between 2016 and 2018 were evaluated. Exclusion criteria included: positive initial CTH and those taking nonoral anticoagulation or antiplatelet agents alone (without warfarin or NOAC). Outcomes included: ICH-d, discharge GCS, administration of reversal agents, neurosurgical intervention, readmission, and death. Multivariable regression was performed to evaluate patient factors associated with the development of ICH-d. RESULTS: A total of 332 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients were divided into a warfarin group (n = 191) and NOAC group (n = 141). The incidence of ICH-d in the warfarin group was 2.6% (5/191) and 2.1% (3/141) in the NOAC group (P = 0.77). There were no reversal agents administered, neurosurgical interventions, readmissions, or deaths in the NOAC group. CONCLUSIONS: Little is known about the impact of NOACs in the setting of trauma, especially regarding risks of ICH-d following traumatic injury. In the NOAC group, ICH-d occurred only 2.1% of the time. In addition, there were no reversal agents given, neurosurgical interventions, or deaths. These data, taken together, suggest the limited utility of repeat imaging in this patient population.