A national analysis of burn injuries among homeless persons presenting to emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: Burn injuries among the homeless are increasing as record numbers of people are unsheltered and resort to unsafe heating practices. This study characterizes burns in homeless encounters presenting to US emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: Burn encounters in the 2019 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) were queried. ICD-10 and CPT codes identified homelessness, injury regions, depths, total body surface area (TBSA %), and treatment plans. Demographics, comorbidities, and charges were analyzed. Discharge weights generated national estimates. Statistical analysis included univariate testing and multivariate modeling. RESULTS: Of 316,344 weighted ED visits meeting criteria, 1919 (0.6%) were homeless. Homeless encounters were older (mean age 44.83 vs. 32.39 years), male-predominant (71% vs. 52%), and had more comorbidities, and were more often White or Black race (p < 0.001). They more commonly presented to EDs in the West and were covered by Medicaid (51% vs. 33%) (p < 0.001). 12% and 5% of homeless burn injuries were related to self-harm and assault, respectively (p < 0.001). Homeless encounters experienced more third-degree burns (13% vs. 4%; p < 0.001), though TBSA % deciles were not significantly different (34% vs. 33% had TBSA % of ten or lower; p = 0.516). Homeless encounters were more often admitted (49% vs. 7%; p < 0.001), and homelessness increased odds of admission (OR 4.779; p < 0.001). Odds of transfer were significantly lower (OR 0.405; p = 0.021). CONCLUSION: Homeless burn ED encounters were more likely due to assault and self-inflicted injuries, and more severe. ED practitioners should be aware of these patients' unique presentation and triage to burn centers accordingly.

Type II odontoid fractures in the elderly presenting to the emergency department: an assessment of factors affecting in-hospital mortality and discharge to skilled nursing facilities.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Type II odontoid fractures (OF) are among the most common cervical spine injuries in the geriatric population. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding their epidemiology. Additionally, the optimal management of these injuries remains controversial, and no study has evaluated the short-term outcomes of geriatric patients presenting to emergency departments (ED). PURPOSE: This study aims to document the epidemiology of geriatric patients presenting to EDs with type II OFs and determine whether surgical management was associated with early adverse outcomes such as in-hospital mortality and discharge to skilled nursing facilities (SNF). STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Data was used from the 2016-2020 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample. Patient encounters corresponding to type II OFs were identified. Patients younger than 65 at the time of presentation to the ED and those with concomitant spinal pathology were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: The association between the surgical management of geriatric type II OFs and outcomes such as in-hospital mortality and discharge to SNFs. METHODS: Patient, fracture, and surgical management characteristics were recorded. A propensity score matched cohort was constructed to reduce differences in age, comorbidities, and injury severity between patients undergoing operative and nonoperative management. Additionally, to develop a positive control for the analysis of geriatric patients with type II OFs and no other concomitant spinal pathology, a cohort of patients that had been excluded due to the presence of a concomitant spinal cord injury (SCI) was also constructed. Multivariate regressions were then performed on both the matched and unmatched cohorts to ascertain the associations between surgical treatment and in-hospital mortality, inpatient length of stay, encounter charges, and discharge to SNFs. RESULTS: A total of 11,325 encounters were included. The mean total charge per encounter was $60,221. 634 (5.6%) patients passed away during their encounters. In total, 1,005 (8.9%) patients were managed surgically. Surgical management of type II OFs was associated with a 316% increase in visit charge (95% CI: 291%-341%, p<.001), increased inpatient length of stay (IRR: 2.87, 95% CI: 2.62-3.12, p<.001), and increased likelihood of discharge to SNFs (OR=2.62, 95% CI: 2.26-3.05, p<.001), but decreased in-hospital mortality (OR=0.32, CI: 0.21-0.45, p<.001). The propensity score matched cohort consisted of 2,010 patients, matching each of the 1,005 that underwent surgery to 1,005 that did not. These cohorts were well balanced across age (78.24 vs 77.91 years), Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (3.68 vs 3.71), and Injury Severity Score (30.15 vs 28.93). This matching did not meaningfully alter the associations determined between surgical management and in-hospital mortality (OR=0.34, CI=0.21-0.55, p<.001) or SNF discharge (OR=2.59, CI=2.13-3.16, p<.001). Lastly, the positive control cohort of patients with concurrent SCI had higher rates of SNF discharge (50.0% vs 42.6%, p<.001), surgical management (32.3% vs 9.7%, p<.001), and in-hospital mortality (28.9% vs 5.6%, p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study lends insight into the epidemiology of geriatric type II OFs and quantifies risk factors influencing adverse outcomes. Patient informed consent should include a discussion of the protective association between definitive surgical management and in-hospital mortality against potential operative morbidity, increased lengths of hospital stay, and increased likelihood of discharge to SNFs. This information may impact patient treatment selection and decision making.

Travel distance and national access to gender-affirming surgery.

BACKGROUND: Gender-affirming surgery is unequally distributed across the United States due to resource allocation, state-based regulations, and the availability of trained physicians. Many individuals seeking gender-affirming surgery travel vast distances to receive care. This study aims to quantify the distances that individuals travel to receive gender-affirming surgery based on procedure type and patient home-of-record location. METHODS: Patients in the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart who underwent gender-affirming surgery were identified via Current Procedural Terminology codes. Data on patient demographics, procedural care, and location of patient and provider were collected. To be included, a patient had to meet diagnostic criteria to receive gender-affirming surgery and have a recorded surgical procedure reimbursed as part of gender-affirming surgery per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines. Patients residing or receiving care outside the continental United States were excluded. Distances between the ZIP Code of each patient's home of record and the location where the gender-affirming surgery was performed were calculated via the Google Maps Distance Matrix API. Distance traveled for gender-affirming surgery by patient state and gender-affirming surgery procedure were determined. Multivariate linear regression analysis determined predictors of distance traveled for gender-affirming surgery, whereas multivariate logistic regression identified variables associated with an increased likelihood of out-of-state travel to gender-affirming surgery. RESULTS: Across 86 million longitudinal patient records, the study population included 2,743 records corresponding to 1,735 patients who received gender-affirming surgery between January 2003 and June 2020. The median distance traveled for gender-affirming surgery was 191 miles (mean: 391.5), and 36.0% of patients traveled out of their state of residence. Every patient from West Virginia, Wyoming, South Dakota, Mississippi, and Delaware traveled out of state for gender-affirming surgery. Patients with homes of record in California (18.4%), Massachusetts (20.7%), and Oregon (19.0%) were the least likely to travel out-of-state for gender-affirming surgery out of states with more than 10 gender-affirming surgery encounters. The main predictors for out-of-state travel included both feminizing and masculinizing genital surgery, as well as an insurance coverage with increased provider options. Additionally, patients traveled shorter distances for gender-affirming surgery after the post-2014 Affordable Care Act expansion compared to pre-2014. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving gender-affirming surgery in the United States travel great distances for their care, often receiving their care from out-of-state providers. Restrictive guidelines imposed by state laws on both the access to and provision of gender-affirming surgery compound the myriad of common difficulties that patients face. It is imperative to discuss potential factors that may mitigate these barriers for those who require gender-affirming surgery.

Is Plastic Surgery Training Equitable? An Analysis of Health Equity across US Plastic Surgery Residency Programs.

Achieving health equity includes training surgeons in environments exemplifying access, treatment, and outcomes across the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic spectrum. Increased attention on health equity has generated metrics comparing hospitals. To establish the quality of health equity in plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) residency training, we determined the mean equity score (MES) across training hospitals of US PRS residencies. Methods: The 2021 Lown Institute Hospital Index database was merged with affiliated training hospitals of US integrated PRS residency programs. The Lown equity category is composed of three domains (community benefit, inclusivity, pay equity) generating a health equity grade. MES (standard deviation) was calculated and reported for residency programs (higher MES represented greater health equity). Linear regression modeled the effects of a program's number of training hospitals, safety net hospitals, and geographical region on MES. Results: The MES was 2.64 (0.62). An estimated 5.9% of programs had an MES between 1-2. In total, 56.5% of programs had an MES between 2 and 3, and 37.7% had an MES of 3 or more. The southern region was associated with a higher MES compared with the reference group (Northeast) (P = 0.03). The number of safety net hospitals per program was associated with higher MES (P = 0.02). Conclusions: Two out of three programs train residents in facilities failing to demonstrate high equity healthcare. Programs should promote health equity by diversifying care delivery through affiliated hospitals. This will aid in the creation of a PRS workforce trained to provide care for a socioeconomically, racially, and ethnically diverse population.

Racial Disparities in Postoperative Breast Reconstruction Outcomes: A National Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that Black patients are more likely to experience complications following breast reconstruction compared to other racial groups. Most of these studies have been conducted on patient populations focusing on either autologous or implant-based reconstruction without possible predictive indicators for complication disparities for all types of reconstruction procedures. The aim of this study is to elucidate disparities among patient demographics by identifying predictors of complications and postoperative outcomes among different racial/ethnic patients undergoing breast reconstruction utilizing multi-state, multi-institution, and national level data. METHODS: Patients in the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart that underwent all billable forms of breast reconstruction were identified via CPT codes. Demographics, medical history, and postoperative outcome data were collected by querying relevant reports of CPT, ICD-9, and ICD-10 codes. Outcomes analysis was limited to the 90-day global postoperative period. A multivariable logistic-regression analysis was performed to ascertain the effects of age, patient reported ethnicity, coexisting conditions, and reconstruction type on the likelihood of any common postoperative complication occurring. Linearity of the continuous variables with respect to the logit of the dependent variable was confirmed. Odds ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: From over 86 million longitudinal patient records, our study population included 104,714 encounters for 57,468 patients who had undergone breast reconstruction between January 2003 and June 2019. Black race (relative to White), autologous reconstruction, hypertension, type II diabetes mellitus, and tobacco use were independent predictors of increased likelihood of complication. Specifically, the odds ratios for complication occurrence for Black, Hispanic, and Asian ethnicity (relative to White) were 1.09, 1.03, and 0.77, respectively. Black patients had an overall breast reconstruction complication rate of 20.4%, while the corresponding rate for White, Hispanic, and Asian patients were 17.0%, 17.9%, and 13.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our analysis of a national-level database shows that Black patients undergoing implant-based or autologous reconstruction have increased risk of complications, likely due to multifactorial components that play a role in the care of this patient population. While higher rates of comorbidities have been cited as a possible cause, providers must consider racial influences involving cultural context, historical mistrust in medicine, and physician/health institution factors that may drive this disparity of outcomes among our patients.

Clinical Outcomes and Cost Differences Between Patients Undergoing Primary Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Procedures with Private or Medicare Insurance: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether the insurance type reflects a patient's quality of care after an anterior discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedure by comparing differences in the postoperative complications, readmission rates, reoperation rates, lengths of hospital stay, and cost of treatment between patients with Medicare versus private insurance. METHODS: Propensity score matching was used to match patient cohorts insured by Medicare and private insurance in the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database (2007-2016). Age, sex, year of operation, geographic region, comorbidities, and operative factors were used to match cohorts of patients who had undergone an ACDF procedure. RESULTS: A total of 110,911 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 97,543 patients (87.9%) were privately insured and 13,368 patients (12.1%) were insured by Medicare. The propensity score matching algorithm matched 7026 privately insured patients to 7026 Medicare patients. After matching, no significant differences were found in the 90-day postoperative complication rates, lengths of stay, or reoperation rates between the Medicare and privately insured cohorts. The Medicare group had had lower postoperative readmission rates for all time points: 30 days (1.8% vs. 4.6%; P < 0.001), 60 days (2.5% vs. 6.3%; P < 0.001), and 90 days (4.2% vs. 7.7%; P < 0.001). The median payment to physicians was significantly lower for the Medicare group ($3885 vs. $5601; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, propensity score matched patients covered by Medicare and private insurance who had undergone an ACDF procedure had had similar treatment outcomes.