Trauma bay virtual reality-A game changer for ATLS instruction and assessment.

BACKGROUND: Medical educational research highlights the need for high-fidelity, multidisciplinary simulation training to teach complex decision-making skills, such as those taught in Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS). This approach is, however, expensive and time-intensive. Virtual reality (VR) education simulation may improve skill acquisition in a cost-effective and time-sensitive manner. We developed a novel trauma VR simulator (TVRSim) for providers to apply ATLS principles. We hypothesized in this pilot study that TVRSim could differentiate practitioner competency with increasing experience and would be well accepted. METHODS: Providers at a Level I trauma center (acute care surgeons, novice (MS4 & PGY1), junior (PGY2 & 3), senior (PGY4-6) residents) ran a blunt, polytrauma VR code. Ten critical decision points were assessed: intubation, cricothyroidotomy, chest tube, intravenous access, focused abdominal sonography for trauma examination, pelvic binder, activation of massive transfusion protocol, administration of hypertonic saline, hyperventilation and decision to go to the operating room (OR). Learner assessment was based on frequency and time to correct decisions. Participant satisfaction was measured using validated surveys. RESULTS: All 31 providers intubated and obtained intravenous access. Novices and juniors frequently failed at hypertonic saline and hyperventilation decisions. Juniors often failed at cricothyroidotomy (60%) and OR (100%) decisions. Mean time to all decisions except going to the OR was longer for all groups compared to acute care surgeons. Mean number of decisions/min was significantly higher for surgeons and seniors compared to juniors and novices. Mortality was 92.3% for novices, 80% for juniors, 25% for seniors and 0% for the attendings. Participants found TVRSim comfortable, easy to use/interact with/performance enhancing, and helped develop skills and learning. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study using a sample of convenience, TVRSim was able to discern decision-making abilities among trainees with increasing experience. All trainees felt that the platform enhanced their performance and facilitated skill acquisition and learning. TVRSim could be a useful adjunct to teach and assess ATLS skills. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level IV.

Use of the spatial access ratio to measure geospatial access to emergency general surgery services in California.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) encompasses a spectrum of time-sensitive and resource-intensive conditions, which require adequate and timely access to surgical care. Developing metrics to accurately quantify spatial access to care is critical for this field. We sought to evaluate the ability of the spatial access ratio (SPAR), which incorporates travel time, hospital capacity, and population demand in its ability to measure spatial access to EGS care and delineate disparities. METHODS: We constructed a geographic information science platform for EGS-capable hospitals in California and mapped population location, race, and socioeconomic characteristics. We compared the SPAR to the shortest travel time model in its ability to identify disparities in spatial access overall and for vulnerable populations. Reduced spatial access was defined as >60 minutes travel time or lowest three classes of SPAR. RESULTS: A total of 283 EGS-capable hospitals were identified, of which 142 (50%) had advanced resources. Using shortest travel time, only 166,950 persons (0.4% of total population) experienced prolonged (>60 minutes) travel time to any EGS-capable hospital, which increased to 1.05 million (2.7%) for advanced-resource centers. Using SPAR, 11.5 million (29.5%) had reduced spatial access to any EGS hospital, and 13.9 million (35.7%) for advanced-resource centers. Rural residents had significantly decreased access for both overall and advanced EGS services when assessed by SPAR despite travel times within the 60-minute threshold. CONCLUSION: While travel time and SPAR showed similar overall geographic patterns of spatial access to EGS hospitals, SPAR identified a greater a greater proportion of the population as having limited access to care. Nearly one third of California residents experience reduced spatial access to EGS hospitals when assessed by SPAR. Metrics that incorporate measures of population demand and hospital capacity in addition to travel time may be useful when assessing spatial access to surgical services. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cross-sectional study, level VI.

Reducing the pain: A cost-effectiveness analysis of transversus abdominis plane block using liposomal bupivacaine for outpatient laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine has been studied as an effective method of reducing the need for postoperative opioids and increasing same-day discharge rates. However, less is known about the cost-effectiveness of this strategy relative to opioids alone for hernia repair. We performed an economic evaluation of these strategies using a computer simulation model. METHODS: A decision tree was constructed to determine cost-effectiveness as measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life-year. Base-case costs, quality-adjusted life-year values, and probabilities were derived from published studies and Medicare fee schedules. For input parameters for which we could not find values in the published literature, we used expert opinion. A 1-month time horizon was selected to focus on the immediate postoperative period. Finally, we performed 1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block was a dominant strategy yielding a $456.75 decrease in cost and an 0.1 increase in quality-adjusted life-years relative to opioids alone. In 1-way sensitivity analysis of cost incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, values were most sensitive to variations in the amount saved by same-day discharge and the cost of bupivacaine. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, transversus abdominis plane strategy was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year in 94.5% of iterations and at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year in 97.1% of iterations. CONCLUSION: The use of liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block resulted in cost savings and improved quality-adjusted life-years in base-case analyses and was cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds in the majority of iterations in probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Readmissions after nonoperative trauma: Increased mortality and costs with delayed intervention.

BACKGROUND: We sought to examine patterns of readmission after nonoperative trauma, including rates of delayed operative intervention and mortality. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2013-2014) was queried for all adult trauma admissions and 30-day readmissions. Index admissions were classified as operative (OI) or nonoperative (NOI), and readmissions examined for major operative intervention (MOR). Multivariable regression modeling was used to evaluate risk for readmission requiring MOR and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 2,244,570 trauma admissions, there were 59,573 readmissions: 66% after NOI, and 35% after OI. Readmission rate was higher after NOI compared with OI (3.6% vs. 1.7% p < 0.001). Readmitted NOI patients were older, with a higher proportion of Injury Severity Score ≥15 and were readmitted earlier (NOI median 8 days vs. OI 11 days). Thirty-one percent of readmitted NOI patients required MOR and experienced higher overall mortality compared with OI patients with operative readmission (NOI 2.9% vs. OI 2%, p = 0.02). Intracranial hemorrhage was an independent risk factor for NOI readmission requiring MOR in both the overall (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.22) and Injury Severity Score of 15 or greater cohorts (hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.24-1.7), with a predominance of nonspine neurosurgical procedures (20.3% and 55.1%, respectively). Operative readmission after NOI cost a median of $17,364 (interquartile range, US $11,481 to US $27,816) and carried a total annual cost of US $147 million (95% CI, US $141 million to $154 million). CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative trauma patients have a higher readmission rate than operative index patients and nearly one third require operative intervention during readmission. Operative readmission carries a higher overall mortality rate in NOI patients and together accounts for nearly US $150 million in annual costs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level III.

Watchful waiting versus elective repair for asymptomatic and minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the decision of watchful waiting (WW) versus elective laparoscopic hernia repair (ELHR) for minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias (PEH) with respect to cost-effectiveness. BACKGROUND: The current recommendation for minimally symptomatic PEHs is watchful waiting. This standard is based on a decision analysis from 2002 that compared the two strategies on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Since that time, the safety of ELHR has improved. A cost-effectiveness study for PEH repair has not been reported. METHODS: A Markov decision model was developed to compare the strategies of WW and ELHR for minimally symptomatic PEH. Input variables were estimated from published studies. Cost data was obtained from Medicare. Outcomes for the two strategies were cost and QALY's. RESULTS: ELHR was superior to the WW strategy in terms of quality of life, but it was more costly. The average cost for a patient in the ELHR arm was 11,771 dollars while for the WW arm it was 2207. CONCLUSION: This study shows that WW and ELHR both have benefits in the management of minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias.

Brain Trauma Foundation Guideline Compliance: Results of a Multidisciplinary, International Survey.

BACKGROUND: Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines reflect evidence-based best practices in management of traumatic brain injury. The aim of this study was to examine self-reported physician compliance and predictors of compliance related to BTF guidelines. METHODS: We conducted an international, multidisciplinary survey examining self-reported adherence to BTF guidelines and multiple factors potentially affecting adherence. We also surveyed intracranial pressure monitoring practices. RESULTS: Of 154 physician respondents, 15.9% reported their institutions "always" follow BTF guidelines and 72.2% reported that they follow them "most of the time." Personal volume of traumatic brain injury cases and years in practice were not significantly related to adherence. Reported adherence varied significantly in association with respondent's institutional trauma level (P = 0.0010): 17.3% of practitioners at level I, 13.0% at level II, and 0% at level III trauma centers reported "always" following guidelines. Reported adherence to guidelines also varied significantly in association with provider specialty (P = 0.015) and institutional volume of severe traumatic brain injury cases (P = 0.008). Regarding intracranial pressure monitoring practices, 52% of respondents used external ventricular drains, 21% used intraparenchymal monitors, and 27% had no preference (P < 0.001). Of respondents not routinely using external ventricular drains, 36% claimed to "always" follow guidelines. There was no apparent association between type of intracranial pressure monitoring used and reported guideline adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Few respondents reported their institutions "always" follow BTF guidelines. General surgeons and providers at high-volume level I trauma centers were more likely to comply with guidelines. Differences in survey responses based on provider and institutional characteristics may help target educational efforts.

Nonoperative management of adhesive small bowel obstruction: what is the break point?

BACKGROUND: The current management paradigm for recurrent adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) is nonoperative. Rates of recurrence differ based on time interval between and number of previous occurrences. Optimal time to intervene has not been determined. METHODS: We constructed a Markov model to evaluate costs and quality of life on a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old patients after their first episode of medical management for postoperative SBO. We estimated a relative risk reduction of .55 with surgical intervention and a relative risk increase of 2.1, 2.9, and 5.7 after the medical management of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th SBO. RESULTS: Surgery performed after earlier episodes of SBO was more costly but also more effective. The cost difference between surgery after the 1st SBO recurrence vs the 2nd SBO recurrence was $1,643, with an increase of .135 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $12,170 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery after the first episode of SBO provides a small increase in QALY at a small cost since surgical intervention lowers the risk of recurrence.

Interval Appendectomy: Finding the Breaking Point for Cost-Effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Patients with phlegmonous appendicitis can be managed nonoperatively, yet debate continues about the need for interval appendectomy (IA), given the low risk of recurrence or neoplasm. We sought to determine for which patient age interval appendectomy is cost-effective. METHODS: Using TreeAge software, a cost-effectiveness model was developed. Two strategies were compared, IA and no interval appendectomy (NIA). Interval appendectomy patients were modeled with probability of benign pathology, cancer or inflammatory bowel disease, and possible operative complications. Patients with NIA were modeled with the probability of recurrence. The probability of malignancy or inflammatory bowel disease developing, or death occurring during a lifetime, was modeled. Base case scenarios at 18, 35, and 50 years old were completed using a Monte Carlo microsimulation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was completed using 2-dimensional sample as a Monte Carlo microsimulation to account for variability for patients 18 to 60 years old. Probabilities of complications developing, pathologic diagnosis requiring additional management, and state utility were extracted from published data. Costs were collected from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and utility was quality-adjusted life years (QALY). RESULTS: For an 18-year-old patient, IA costs $9,417.22 with a gain of 16.59 QALYs compared with NIA, which costs $11,613.57 with a gain of 16.52 QALYs. For a 35-year-old, IA costs $8,989.16 with 9.1 QALYs gained. No interval appendectomy costs $6,614.61 and 9.09 QALYs gained. For the 35-year-old patient, the interval cost-effectiveness ratio comparing NIA with IA is $237,455/QALY. As patient age increases, the interval cost-effectiveness ratio increases. Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, IA remains cost-effective until the patient is 33 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Interval appendectomy should be considered in patients younger than 34 years of age.

Safe, timely, convenient, and cost-effective: a single-center experience with bedside placement of enteral feeding tubes by midlevel providers using fluoroscopic guidance.

BACKGROUND: Enteral feeding tube placement has been performed by nurses, gastroenterologists using endoscopy, and interventional radiologists. We hypothesized that midlevel providers placed feeding tubes at bedside using fluoroscopy safely, rapidly, and cost-effectively. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed bedside feeding tube placement under fluoroscopy by trained nurse practitioners. We compared charges for this method with charges for placement by other practitioners. RESULTS: Nurse practitioners placed 632 feeding tubes in 462 patients. Three hundred seventy-nine placements took place in mechanically ventilated placements. Ninety-seven percent of tubes were positioned past the pylorus. The mean fluoroscopy time was 0.7 ± 1.2 minutes. The mean procedure time was 7.0 ± 5.1 minutes. All tubes were placed within 24 hours of the request. There were no complications. Institutional charges for tube placement were $149 for nurse practitioners, $226 for gastroenterologists, and $328 for interventional radiologists. CONCLUSIONS: The placement of feeding tubes under fluoroscopy by nurse practitioners is safe, timely, and cost-effective.

Cost-effective analysis of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus surgical portacaval shunt for variceal bleeding in early cirrhosis.

Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage carries significant morbidity and mortality in patients with portal hypertension and cirrhosis. The optimal prevention strategy for rebleeding in these patients remains controversial with respect to the safety and efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) versus a portocaval surgical shunt (PC). We sought to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness of these two treatments. A Markov state transition decision analysis was created and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis performed to follow patients with early cirrhosis who have an upper gastrointestinal bleed despite medical therapy into either TIPS or PC. Patients were followed throughout the transition states until either death or survival. Probabilities of gastrointestinal rebleed, hepatic encephalopathy, surgical and TIPS-related complications as well as death were obtained from an extensive literature review. Costs were derived from average Medicare reimbursements. The main outcome was dollars per life-year saved. For patients with mild to moderate cirrhosis with upper gastrointestinal variceal bleed, the average cost per life year saved was $17,771 (SD = 471) and $21,438 (SD = 308) for TIPS and PC, respectively. The average life expectancy was 5.0 years and 7.0 years for TIPS and PC, respectively. This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness rate for portocaval shunt of $3,299 per life year saved. Compared with TIPS, surgical PC shunt resulted in improved survival with minimal increase in cost. Therefore, given the low incremental cost of PC, it should be adopted as a cost-effective strategy in managing this patient population.