Patient Navigator Intervention to Improve Palliative Care Outcomes for Hispanic Patients With Serious Noncancer Illness: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Disparities persist across the trajectory of serious illness, including at the end of life. Patient navigation has been shown to reduce disparities and improve outcomes for underserved populations. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of a lay patient navigator intervention, Apoyo con Cariño, in improving palliative care outcomes among Hispanic patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a multicenter randomized clinical trial that took place across academic, nonprofit, safety-net, and community health care systems in urban, rural, and mountain/frontier regions of Colorado from January 2017 to January 2021. Self-identifying Hispanic adults with serious noncancer medical illness and limited prognosis were recruited. Data were collected and analyzed from July 2022 to July 2023. Interventions: Participants randomized to the intervention group received 5 home visits from a bilingual, bicultural lay patient navigator; participants randomized to control received care as usual. Both groups received culturally tailored educational materials. Investigators/outcome accessors remained blinded to participant assignment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in score from baseline to 3 months on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) General quality of life (QOL) scale (primary outcome), Advance Care Planning (ACP) Engagement Survey, Brief Pain Inventory, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, and FACIT Spiritual Well-Being subscale; at 6 months, advance directive (AD) documentation; and at 46 months or death, hospice utilization and length of stay, as well as aggressiveness of care at end of life. Results: Of 209 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [14.3] years; 108 [51.7%] male), 105 patients were randomized to control and 104 patients to the intervention. There were no statistically significant differences in the change in mean (SD) QOL score between the intervention and control groups (5.0 [16.5] vs 4.3 [15.5]; P = .75). Participants in the intervention group, compared with the control group, had statistically significant greater increases in mean (SD) ACP engagement (0.8 [1.3] vs 0.1 [1.4]; P < .001) and were more likely to have a documented AD (62 of 104 [59.6%] vs 28 of 105 [26.9%]; P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences in mean (SD) change in pain intensity score (0-10) between patients in the intervention group compared with control (-0.4 [2.6] vs -0.5 [2.8]; P = .79), nor pain interference (-0.2 [3.7] vs -0.4 [3.7]; P = .71). Patients receiving the intervention were more likely to be referred to hospice compared with patients receiving control (19 of 43 patients [44.2%] vs 7 of 33 patients [21.2%]; P = .04) and less likely to receive aggressive care at end of life (27 of 42 patients [64.3%] vs 28 of 33 patients [84.8%]; P = .046). Conclusion and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, a culturally tailored patient navigator intervention did not improve QOL for patients. However, the intervention did increase ACP engagement, AD documentation, and hospice utilization in Hispanic persons with serious medical illness. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03181750.

A National Assessment of Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cleft Lip Repair.

PURPOSE: This study examined the impact of patient race/ethnicity on the likelihood of experiencing delays to surgery, post-operative surgical complications, and prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS) following primary cleft lip (CL) repair. METHODS: Patients who underwent CL repair were identified in the 2006-2012 Kids' Inpatient Database. Primary outcomes were defined as treatment after 6-months-old, presence of any surgical complication, LOS >1 day, and total hospital charges. Multivariable analyses were performed to adjust for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics that might account for differences in outcomes. RESULTS: There were 5927 eligible patients with cleft lip: 3724 White, 279 Black, 1316 Hispanic, 277 Asian/Pacific-Islander, and 331 other race/ethnicity. Across all outcomes, there were significant unadjusted differences (p<0.001) by race/ethnicity, with White children having the lowest odds of delayed surgery, complications, and prolonged LOS, and the lowest charges. Multivariable analyses suggested that differences in baseline health status may account for much of this disparity in combination with factors such as income, insurance type, and location. Even after adjusting for co-variates, significantly increased odds of delayed surgery and higher charges remained for Hispanic and Asian/PI patients. CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in the odds of delays, complications, prolonged hospital stays, and total charges among CL patients of different race/ethnicity. Advocacy efforts to ameliorate disparity in early infant health may subsequently improve equity in cleft outcomes.

The Impact of Socioeconomic Factors on the 2022 Plastic Surgery Match.

BACKGROUND: In 2022, the plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) match faced unprecedented system-wide transitions that have redefined conventional measures of applicant success. This challenges the equitable assessment of student competitiveness and diversity in the field. METHODS: A survey of demography, application content, and 2022 match outcomes was distributed to applicants to a single PRS residency program. Comparative statistics and regression models were performed to assess the predictive value of factors in match success and quality. RESULTS: A total of 151 respondents (response rate 49.7%) were analyzed. Although step 1 and step 2 CK scores were significantly higher among matched applicants, neither examination predicted match success. Most respondents (52.3%) were women, although gender was also not significantly associated with match success. Underrepresented in medicine applicants made up 19.2% of responses and 16.7% of matches, and the plurality of respondents (22.5%) were raised with a household income ≥$300,000. Both Black race and household income ≤$100,000 were associated with lower odds of scoring above a 240 on either step 1 or step 2 CK (Black: OR, 0.03 and 0.06; P < 0.05 and P < 0.001; income: OR, 0.07-0.47 and 0.1 to 0.8, among income subgroups), receiving interview offers (OR, -9.4; P < 0.05; OR, -11.0 to -5.4), and matching into PRS (OR, 0.2; P < 0.05; OR, 0.2 to 0.5), compared with White and high-income applicants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic inequities in the match process disadvantage underrepresented in medicine candidates and those from lower household incomes. As the residency match continues to evolve, programs must understand and mitigate the impacts of bias in various application components.

The Burden of COVID-19 on Surgeons' Financial Relationship with the Industry.

The healthcare system has been greatly affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of this study was to compare pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 payments between industry and medical providers for all surgeons and subspecialized surgeons. Payment information was obtained from the Open Payments Program database for the 2019 and 2020 reported periods for three physician groups: all physicians, all surgeons, and each surgical subspecialty. Comparison and analysis of payment amount and type between these years was performed for each cohort. Physicians experienced a 36% decrease in industry payments with surgeons experiencing a 30.4% decrease. All surgical subspecialties, including plastic surgery (-30.5%; P < 0.01), experienced a significant decrease in industry payments except for transplant surgery, trauma surgery, and neurological surgery. Charitable contributions and compensation for services other than consulting were the only payment types that increased from 2019 to 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted industry physician payments across all medical and surgical fields with payment decreases across almost all surgical subspecialties.

Characterizing the Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Orbital Floor Reconstruction: A National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Orbital floor fractures result in posterior globe displacement known as enophthalmos, and diplopia due to extraorbital soft tissue impingement. Surgical repair may involve the use of autolo-gous or synthetic materials. Previous studies have demonstrated a higher prevalence of orbital floor fractures among lower socioeconomic status (SES) populations. The authors aimed to characterize the impact of socioeconomic status on surgical management, outcomes, and use of synthetic orbital implant. The authors conducted a cross-sectional study of adult orbital floor fracture patients from 2002 to 2017 using the National Inpatient Sample. Among patients who underwent surgical treatment, our study found decreased synthetic orbital implant use among uninsured and Black patients and decreased home discharge among Medicare patients. There were no differences in orbital reconstruction. Further research is needed to elucidate possible mechanisms driving these findings.

Evidence-based practice strategies for faculty professional development in clinical translational research at Institutional Development Award (IDeA) state institutions in the Mountain West.

The Mountain West Clinical Translational Research - Infrastructure Network (MW CTR-IN), established in 2013, is a research network of 13 university partners located among seven Institutional Development Award (IDeA) states targeting health disparities. This is an enormous undertaking because of the size of the infrastructure network (encompassing a third of the US landmass and spanning four time zones in predominantly rural and underserved areas, with populations that have major health disparities issues). In this paper, we apply the barriers, strategies, and metrics to an adapted educational conceptual model by Fink (2013). Applying this model, we used four tailored approaches across this regional infrastructure network to: (1) assess individual faculty specific needs, (2) reach out and engage with faculty, (3) provide customized services to meet the situational needs of faculty, and (4) utilize a "closed communication feedback loop" between Professional Development (PD) core and MW CTR-IN faculty within the context of their home institutional environment. Summary statement results from participating faculty show that these approaches were positive. Grounded in best educational practice approaches, we have an opportunity to refine and build from this sound foundation with implications for future use in other CTR-IN networks and institutions in the IDeA states.

Plastic Surgeons and their Financial Relationships with the Industry in the era of COVID: Insights from the Physician Payments Sunshine Act.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on physician relationships with industry and subsequent financial implications has not been previously assessed. The aim of this study is to compare pre- and post-COVID-19 payments between industry and medical providers for all plastic surgeons. METHODS: Payment information was collected for the 2019 and 2020 reporting periods from the Open Payments Program (OPP) database for plastic surgeons and plastic surgeon subspecialists. An analysis was performed of trends and comparison of payments for each year for all plastic surgeons and each subspecialty cohort. RESULTS: For all plastic surgeons, there was a decrease in industry payments between 2019 and 2020 (- 30.5%). All plastic surgery subspecialties had a decrease in payments with general plastic and reconstructive surgery affected the most (- 56%) and craniofacial surgery affected the least (- 9%). Payments for almost all categories for plastic surgeons decreased along with compensation as faculty or as speakers. Total charitable contributions and grant payments increased by 61 and 273%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Analysis of industry-physician payments available through the Sunshine Act shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted industry payments to plastic surgery and its subspecialties. While this study demonstrates the economic impact of the current pandemic, only time will tell whether these trends will persist in the coming years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Sharing the Operating Room: A Descriptive Study of Combined and Collaborative Plastic Surgery Cases.

BACKGROUND: Plastic surgeons are often asked for intraoperative assistance by other surgical services. Improvement of a plastic surgery service has been shown to improve patient outcomes, decrease length of stay, and increase hospital revenue, yet plastic surgery's contribution to a hospital tends to be undervalued. The purpose of this study was to quantify the multidisciplinary role the plastic surgery service plays within a single, large pediatric institution. METHODS: Surgical cases involving both plastic surgery and at least one other team were identified from 2016 to 2019. Each case was categorized as either "combined" or "collaborative" based on whether the two teams worked separately on separate problems or together on the same problem, respectively. Data points collected included combined and collaborative cases, operating room hours, and total hospital charges billed. RESULTS: Of the 7564 total plastic surgery cases performed, multidisciplinary cases made up a minority of total cases (16 percent) but required 32 percent of the operating room hours and provided 49 percent of the total charges billed. Collaborative cases alone accounted for 20 percent of the service's operating room hours and 39 percent of total charges billed, while making up only 8 percent of total cases. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to cases where plastic surgery operates alone, combined and collaborative cases account for a disproportionately high number of operating room hours and provide a disproportionately high amount of charges billed.

The Opportunity Cost of Resident Involvement in Adult Craniofacial Surgery: An Analysis of Relative Value Units.

PURPOSE: Within the academic surgical setting resident involvement may confer longer operative times. The increasing pressures to maximize clinical productivity and decreasing reimbursement rates, however, may conflict with these principles. This study calculates the opportunity cost of resident involvement in craniofacial surgery. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted with patients who underwent craniofacial procedures from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2005 to 2012. Patients were selected based on relevant Current Procedural Terminology codes for craniofacial pathologies (ie, trauma, head and neck reconstruction, orthognathic surgery, and facial reanimation). Variables included patient demographics, operative time, and presence or absence of resident trainee. Average relative value units were calculated to determine the opportunity cost of resident involvement for each craniofacial procedure. RESULTS: In total, 2096 patients were identified through the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2005 to 2012. Resident involvement was associated with a statistically significant higher operative time (P < 0.001) for facial reanimation, facial trauma, orthognathic surgery, and head and neck reconstruction. The opportunity costs per case associated with resident involvement were the highest for head and neck reconstruction ($1468.04), followed by orthognathic surgery ($1247.03), facial trauma ($533.03), and facial reanimation ($358.32). Resident involvement was associated with higher rate of complications for head and neck reconstruction (P < 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Resident involvement is associated with longer operative times, higher complications, and higher re-operations, compared to attending exclusive surgical care. Future studies may consider how reimbursements should align incentives to promote resident education and training.

Plastic Surgeon Financial Compensation-Incentivization Models in Surgical Care Delivery: The Past, Present, and Future.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons are critical for the success of any health care enterprise. However, few studies have examined the potential impact of value-based care on surgeon compensation. METHODS: This review presents value-based financial incentive models that will shape the future of surgeon compensation. The following incentivization models will be discussed: pay-for-reporting, pay-for-performance, pay-for-patient-safety, bundled payments, and pay-for-academic-productivity. Moreover, the authors suggest the application of the congruence model-a model developed to help business leaders understand the interplay of forces that shape the performance of their organizations-to determine surgeon compensation methods applicable in value-based care-centric environments. RESULTS: The application of research in organizational behavior can assist health care leaders in developing surgeon compensation models optimized for value-based care. Health care leaders can utilize the congruence model to determine total surgeon compensation, proportion of compensation that is short term versus long term, proportion of compensation that is fixed versus variable, and proportion of compensation based on seniority versus performance. CONCLUSION: This review provides a framework extensively studied by researchers in organizational behavior that can be utilized when designing surgeon financial compensation plans for any health care entity shifting toward value-based care.

Perceptions of Financial Conflict of Interest and Knowledge of the Sunshine Act Among Orthopedic Surgery Patients.

The orthopedic surgical specialty is strongly tied to partnerships with industry that have fostered innovation and greatly enhanced patient care. A substantial number of orthopedic surgeons currently receive some form of industry support. These relationships are highly scrutinized because they present the possibility of both personal and financial conflicts of interest (COI). The authors examined orthopedic patients' awareness of existing regulation and perceptions of financial COI by performing a prospective survey-based study of patients seen in an academic orthopedic department. Data were collected during 1 year, in a cross-section of hospital-based and community clinical settings. The authors collected 513 surveys during a 1-year period between 4 clinical locations. Of all respondents, 55% were unconcerned regarding gifts or direct compensation their physicians received from industry, and only 16% were very or extremely concerned regarding these benefits. Patients' opinions regarding possible influence of benefits were similarly ambivalent, with 54% of patients minimally or not at all concerned regarding the potential influence of industry gifts or compensation. Seventy-six percent of patients had never heard of the Sunshine Act, and only 3% indicated that they were aware of the legislation and its intention. The income of the respondents and their level of education were positively correlated with increased concern about handling of COI, as well as knowledge regarding the Sunshine Act. These data suggest that orthopedic surgery patients are widely unconcerned regarding physician COI, but specific subsets of patients may be more likely to have concerns regarding these relationships. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(5):e682-e686.].

Health Equity and Healthcare Disparities in Plastic Surgery: What We Can Do.

Amidst the unexpected losses and challenges of 2020, healthcare disparities and health equity have presided as noteworthy topics of national discussion among healthcare workers, governmental officials, and society at large. Health equity, defined as the opportunity for everyone to be as healthy as possible, may be achieved through the alleviation of healthcare disparities. Healthcare disparities are defined as "preventable differences in the burden of disease, injury, violence, or opportunities to achieve optimal health that are experienced by socially disadvantaged populations." While these concepts may be perceived as a departure from the core responsibility of plastic surgeons, it is of paramount importance to recognize how race, socioeconomic status (SES), and physical environment impact access to care, surgical outcomes, and postoperative recovery for vulnerable populations. In this communication, our purpose is two-fold: 1) to elucidate the existent healthcare disparities and associations with race and SES in craniofacial, trauma, breast, hand, and gender-affirming reconstruction; and 2) provide tangible recommendations to incorporate the concepts of health equity and healthcare disparities in clinical, research, community, and recruitment settings for plastic surgeons. Through such knowledge, plastic surgeons may glean important insights that may enhance the delivery of equitable and accessible care for patients.

The Geographic Availability of Certified Cleft Care in the United States: A National Geospatial Analysis of 1-Hour Access to Care.

PURPOSE: Children with cleft lip and/or palate (CLP) require longitudinal multidisciplinary care. Travel distance to comprehensive cleft centers may be a barrier for some families. This study evaluated the geospatial availability of certified cleft teams across the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A geographic catchment area within a 1-hour travel radius of each American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association-certified cleft center was mapped using TravelTime distance matrix programming. The proportion of children located within each catchment area was calculated using county-level data from the National Kids Count Data Center, with aggregate estimates of patients with CLP based on state-level data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. One-hour access was compared across regions and based on urbanization data collected from the US Census. RESULTS: There were 182 American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association-certified centers identified. As per study estimates, 28,331 (27.3%) children with CLP did not live within 1-hour travel distance to any center. One-hour access was highest in the Northeast (84.2% of children, P < .001) and lowest in the South (65.7%) and higher in states with the greatest urbanization in comparison with more rural states (85.1 vs 37.4%, P < .001). Similar patterns were seen for access to 2 or more cleft centers. The number of CLP children-per-center was highest in the West (775) and lowest in the Northeast (452). CONCLUSIONS: Travel distances of more than 1 hour may affect more than 25,000 (1 of 4) CLP children in the US, with significant variation across geographic regions. Future studies should seek to understand the impact of and provide strategies for overcoming geographic barriers.