A Qualitative Study of Emergency Medicaid Programs From the Perspective of Hospital Stakeholders.

INTRODUCTION: Uninsured patients often have poor clinical outcomes associated with lower access to care. Hospital Presumptive Eligibility (HPE) provides up to 60-d emergency Medicaid coverage for uninsured, low-income patients. After obtaining 60-d HPE, patients must file for ongoing Medicaid to sustain coverage; however, navigating HPE approval is complex. We conducted a qualitative study to understand (1) stakeholder perspectives on the application process and workflow and (2) facilitators and barriers to HPE approval to understand process improvement opportunities. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews between September-December 2021 with key stakeholders (social workers, financial counselors, case managers, and private third-party vendor representatives) involved in HPE coverage determination, screening, approval, and Medicaid sustainment at our institution. We performed a team-based thematic analysis to elicit factors influencing HPE screening and approval, and recommendations for process improvement. RESULTS: Study participants described the HPE application and Medicaid approval processes. Patient-level barriers included information disclosure and immigration status, inability to contact patients or next-of-kin, and knowledge gaps about insurance acquisition and sustainment. System-level barriers included technical challenges with the state HPE application portal, inadequate staffing for patient screening, and short emergency department stays that limited opportunities to initiate HPE. Stakeholders proposed improvements in education, patient outreach, and logistics. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study reveals the process of HPE approval and outlines barriers within HPE and Medicaid processing from the perspective of direct hospital stakeholders. We identified opportunities at the patient, hospital, and policy levels that could improve successful HPE application and approval rates.

Trends in disparities research on trauma and acute care surgery outcomes: A 10-year systematic review of articles published in The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery.

ABSTRACT: This is a 10-year review of The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (JTACS) literature related to health care disparities, health care inequities, and patient outcomes. A retrospective review of articles published in JTACS between January 1, 2013, and July 15, 2022, was performed. Articles screened included both adult and pediatric trauma populations. Included articles focused on patient populations related to trauma, surgical critical care, and emergency general surgery. Of the 4,178 articles reviewed, 74 met the inclusion criteria. Health care disparities related to gender (n = 10), race/ethnicity (n = 12), age (n = 14), income status (n = 6), health literacy (n = 6), location and access to care (n = 23), and insurance status (n = 13) were described. Studies published on disparities peaked in 2016 and 2022 with 13 and 15 studies respectively but dropped to one study in 2017. Studies demonstrated a significant increase in mortality for patients in rural geographical regions and in patients without health insurance and a decrease in patients who were treated at a trauma center. Gender disparities resulted in variable mortality rates and studied factors, including traumatic brain injury mortality and severity, venous thromboembolism, ventilator-associated pneumonia, firearm homicide, and intimate partner violence. Under-represented race/ethnicity was associated with variable mortality rates, with one study demonstrating increased mortality risk and three finding no association between race/ethnicity and mortality. Disparities in health literacy resulted in decreased discharge compliance and worse long-term functional outcomes. Studies on disparities in JTACS over the last decade primarily focused on location and access to health care, age, insurance status, and race, with a specific emphasis on mortality. This review highlights the areas in need of further research and funding in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery regarding health care disparities in trauma aimed at interventions to reduce disparities in patient care, ensure equitable care, and inform future approaches targeting health care disparities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review; Level IV.

Quality care is equitable care: a call to action to link quality to achieving health equity within acute care surgery.

Health equity is defined as the sixth domain of healthcare quality. Understanding health disparities in acute care surgery (defined as trauma surgery, emergency general surgery and surgical critical care) is key to identifying targets that will improve outcomes and ensure delivery of high-quality care within healthcare organizations. Implementing a health equity framework within institutions such that local acute care surgeons can ensure equity is a component of quality is imperative. Recognizing this need, the AAST (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma) Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee convened an expert panel entitled 'Quality Care is Equitable Care' at the 81st annual meeting in September 2022 (Chicago, Illinois). Recommendations for introducing health equity metrics within health systems include: (1) capturing patient outcome data including patient experience data by race, ethnicity, language, sexual orientation, and gender identity; (2) ensuring cultural competency (eg, availability of language services; identifying sources of bias or inequities); (3) prioritizing health literacy; and (4) measuring disease-specific disparities such that targeted interventions are developed and implemented. A stepwise approach is outlined to include health equity as an organizational quality indicator.

Evaluating Emergency Medicaid Program Policy Changes During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Trauma patients are twice as likely to be uninsured as the general population, which can lead to limited access to postinjury resources and higher mortality. The Hospital Presumptive Eligibility (HPE) program offers emergency Medicaid for eligible patients at presentation. The HPE program underwent several changes during the COVID-19 pandemic; we quantify the program's success during this time and seek to understand features associated with HPE approval. METHODS: A mixed methods study at a Level I trauma center using explanatory sequential design, including: 1) a retrospective cohort analysis (2015-2021) comparing HPE approval before and after COVID-19 policy changes; and 2) semistructured interviews with key stakeholders. RESULTS: 589 patients listed as self-pay or Medicaid presented after March 16, 2020, when COVID-19 policies were first implemented. Of these, 409 (69%) patients were already enrolled in Medicaid at hospitalization. Among those uninsured at arrival, 160 (89%) were screened and 98 (61%) were approved for HPE. This marks a significant improvement in the prepandemic HPE approval rate (48%). In adjusted logistic regression analyses, the COVID-19 period was associated with an increased likelihood of HPE approval (versus prepandemic: aOR, 1.64; P = 0.005). Qualitative interviews suggest that mechanisms include state-based expansion in HPE eligibility and improvements in remote approval such as telephone/video conferencing. CONCLUSIONS: The HPE program experienced an overall increased approval rate and adapted to policy changes during the pandemic, enabling more patients' access to health insurance. Ensuring that these beneficial changes remain a part of our health policy is an important aspect of improving access to health insurance for our patients.

Insurance churn after adult traumatic injury: A national evaluation among a large private insurance database.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic injury leads to significant disability, with injured patients often requiring substantial health care resources to return to work and baseline health. Temporary disability or inability to work can result in changes or loss of employer-based private insurance coverage, which may significantly impact health care access and outcomes. Among privately insured patients, we hypothesized increased instability in insurance coverage for patients with higher severity of injury. METHODS: Adults 18 years and older presenting to a hospital with traumatic injury were evaluated for insurance churn using Clinformatics Data Mart private-payer claims. Insurance churn was defined as cessation of enrollment in the patient's private health insurance plan. Using Injury Severity Score (ISS), we compared insurance churn over the year following injury between patients with mild (ISS, <9), moderate (ISS, 9-15), severe (ISS, 16-24), and very severe (ISS, >24) injuries. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare time with insurance churn by ISS category. Flexible parametric regression was used to estimate hazard ratios for insurance churn. RESULTS: Among 750,862 privately insured patients suffering from a traumatic injury, 50% experienced insurance churn within 1 year after injury. Compared with patients who remained on their insurance plan, patients who experienced insurance churn were younger and more likely male and non-White. The median time to insurance churn was 7.7 months for those with mild traumatic injury, 7.5 months for moderately or severely injured, and 7.1 months for the very severely injured. In multivariable analysis, increasing injury severity was associated with higher rates of insurance churn compared with mild injury, up to 14% increased risk for the very severely injured. CONCLUSION: Increasing severity of traumatic injury is associated with higher levels of health coverage churn among the privately insured. Lack of continuous access to health services may prolong recovery and further aggravate the medical and social impact of significant traumatic injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Value Based Evaluations; Level III.

Emergency Medicaid programs may be an effective means of providing sustained insurance among trauma patients: A statewide longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospital Presumptive Eligibility (HPE) is a temporary Medicaid insurance at hospitalization that offsets costs of care, increases access to postdischarge resources, and provides patients with a path to sustain coverage through Medicaid. Because HPE only lasts up to 60 days, we aimed to determine Medicaid insurance status 6 months after injury among HPE-approved trauma patients and identify factors associated with successful sustainment. METHODS: Using a customized longitudinal claims data set for HPE-approved patients from the California Department of Health Care Services, we analyzed adults with a primary trauma diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases version 10) who were HPE approved in 2016 and 2017. Our primary outcome was Medicaid sustainment at 6 months. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 9,749 trauma patients with HPE were analyzed; 6,795 (69.7%) sustained Medicaid at 6 months. Compared with patients who did not sustain, those who sustained had higher Injury Severity Score (ISS > 15: 73.5% vs. 68.7%, p < 0.001), more frequent surgical intervention (74.8% vs. 64.5%, p < 0.001), and were more likely to be discharged to postacute services (23.9% vs. 10.4%, p < 0.001). Medicaid sustainment was high among patients who identified as White (86.7%), Hispanic (86.7%), Black (84.3%), and Asian (83.7%). Medicaid sustainment was low among the 2,505 patients (25.7%) who declined to report race, ethnicity, or preferred language (14.8% sustainment). In adjusted analyses, major injuries (ISS > 16) (vs. ISS < 15: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.51; p = 0.02) and surgery (aOR, 1.85; p < 0.001) were associated with increased likelihood of Medicaid sustainment. Declining to disclose race, ethnicity, or language (aOR, 0.05; p < 0.001) decreased the likelihood of Medicaid sustainment. CONCLUSION: Hospital Presumptive Eligibility programs are a promising pathway for securing long-term insurance coverage for trauma patients, particularly among the severely injured who likely require ongoing access to health care services. Patient and provider interviews would help to elucidate barriers for patients who do not sustain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Out-of-Pocket Costs Among Patients With a New Cancer Diagnosis Enrolled in High-Deductible Health Plans vs Traditional Insurance.

Importance: The financial burden of a cancer diagnosis is increasing rapidly with advances in cancer care. Simultaneously, more individuals are enrolling in high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) vs traditional insurance than ever before. Objective: To characterize the out-of-pocket costs (OOPCs) of cancer care for individuals in HDHPs vs traditional insurance plans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used the administrative claims data of a single national insurer in the US for 134 826 patients aged 18 to 63 years with a new diagnosis of breast, colorectal, lung, or other cancer from 2008 to 2018 with 24 months or more of continuous enrollment. Propensity score matching was performed to create comparator groups based on the presence or absence of an incident cancer diagnosis. Exposures: A new cancer diagnosis and enrollment in an HDHP vs a traditional health insurance plan. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was OOPCs among individuals with breast, colon, lung, or all other types of cancer combined compared with those with no cancer diagnosis. A triple difference-in-differences analysis was performed to identify incremental OOPCs based on cancer diagnosis and enrollment in HDHPs vs traditional plans. Results: After propensity score matching, 134 826 patients remained in each of the cancer (73 572 women [55%]; median age, 53 years [IQR, 46-58 years]; 110 071 non-Hispanic White individuals [82%]) and noncancer (66 619 women [49%]; median age, 53 years [IQR, 46-59 years]; 105 023 non-Hispanic White individuals [78%]) cohorts. Compared with baseline costs of medical care among individuals without cancer, a breast cancer diagnosis was associated with the highest incremental OOPC ($714.68; 95% CI, $664.91-$764.45), followed by lung ($475.51; 95% CI, $340.16-$610.86), colorectal ($361.41; 95% CI, $294.34-$428.48), and all other types of cancer combined ($90.51; 95% CI, $74.22-$106.79). Based on the triple difference-in-differences analysis, compared with patients without cancer enrolled in HDHPs, those with breast cancer paid $1683.36 in additional yearly OOPCs (95% CI, $1576.66-$1790.07), those with colorectal cancer paid $1420.06 more (95% CI, $1232.31-$1607.80), those with lung cancer paid $467.25 more (95% CI, $130.13-$804.37), and those with other types of cancer paid $550.87 more (95% CI, $514.75-$586.99). Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with cancer and private insurance experienced sharp increases in OOPCs compared with those without cancer, which was amplified among those with HDHPs. These findings illustrate the degree to which HDHPs offer poorer protection than traditional insurance against unexpected health care expenses. Coupled with the increasing cost of cancer care, higher cost sharing in the form of increasing enrollment in HDHPs requires further research on the potential clinical consequences through delayed or foregone care.

Understanding Health Care Utilization and Mortality After Emergency General Surgery in Patients With Underlying Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND: Mortality and complications are not well defined nationally for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients presenting with underlying all-cause liver disease (LD). STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed the 2012-2014 National Inpatient Sample for adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with a primary EGS diagnosis. Underlying LD included International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes for alcoholic and viral hepatitis, malignancy, congenital etiologies, and cirrhosis. The primary outcome was mortality; secondary outcomes included complications, operative intervention, and costs. RESULTS: Of the 6.8 million EGS patients, 358 766 (5.3%) had underlying LD. 59.1% had cirrhosis, 6.7% had portal hypertension, and 13.7% had ascites. Compared with other EGS patients, EGS-LD patients had higher mean costs ($12 847 vs $10 234, P < .001). EGS-LD patients were less likely to have surgery (26.1% vs 37.0%, P < .001) but for those who did, mortality was higher (4.8% vs 1.8%, P < .001). Risk factors for mortality included ascites (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.68, P < .001), dialysis (aOR = 3.44, P < .001), sepsis (aOR = 8.97, P < .001), and respiratory failure requiring intubation (aOR = 10.40, P < .001). Odds of death increased in both surgical (aOR = 4.93, P < .001) and non-surgical EGS-LD patients (aOR = 2.56, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Underlying all-cause LD among EGS patients is associated with increased in-hospital mortality, even in the absence of surgical intervention.

Emergency Medicaid Acquisition Through the Affordable Care Act: The Association Between Hospital Enrollment in California and Hospital Revenue.

BACKGROUND: Hospital Presumptive Eligibility (HPE) is a national policy stemming from the Affordable Care Act that allows qualified hospitals, working with state officials, to enroll eligible patients for temporary Medicaid coverage. Although all states are required to operate an HPE program, hospital participation is elective and variable. It is unclear which hospitals choose to participate in HPE and how participation affects hospital utilization and revenue. OBJECTIVE: We examined hospital factors associated with HPE participation in the state of California and assessed pre and post changes in hospital revenue and utilization for HPE and non-HPE hospitals. RESEARCH DESIGN: We performed a logistic regression to identify hospital attributes associated with HPE participation. We then used a difference in differences methodology with a hospital fixed effect to test whether HPE enrollment was associated with changes in annual revenues by payer source, uncompensated care costs, outpatient visits, and/or discharges. RESULTS: Three quarters (76%) of qualified hospitals elected to participate in HPE by the end of 2018. Hospitals with 100 or more beds had over 10 times greater odds of participating in HPE compared with smaller hospitals. Hospitals that did not provide outpatient care were significantly less likely to participate. Among hospitals included in trend analyses, enrollment in HPE was associated with increased annual net patient Medicaid revenue and decreased uncompensated care charges. We predicted that HPE enrollment was associated with an average of 9.7% (95% confidence interval: 3.4%-16.4%) increase in annual net patient Medicaid revenue. As of 2018, ∼33,000 adults and children were enrolled in California's HPE program per month. CONCLUSION: Hospital enrollment in the HPE program shifted costs from uncompensated care to Medicaid.

Traumatic Injuries Due to Interpersonal and Domestic Violence in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Domestic and intimate partner violence (DV) are under-reported causes of injury. We describe the health care utilization of DV patients, hypothesizing they are at increased risk of mortality. METHODS: We queried the 2014 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample for adult patients (18 y and older) with a primary diagnosis of trauma. DV was abstracted using International Statistical Classification of Diseases, ninth Revision codes for partner or spouse intimate violence, abuse, or neglect. The primary outcome was mortality; secondary outcomes included admission rates and charges. RESULTS: Among 14 million trauma patients, 654,356 (5.0%) had a diagnosis of DV. Compared with other trauma patients, DV patients were younger (34.6 versus 46.8 y, P < 0.001), more often male (69.5% versus 50.1%, P < 0.001), and more likely to be uninsured (31.5% versus 15.6%, P < 0.001). 9154 (1.4%) were injured because of intimate partner violence, of which 90.2% were female. Drug and alcohol abuse (22.2%), anxiety (1.8%), and depression (1.3%) were high among all DV trauma patients. DV emergency department charges were higher ($4462 versus $2,871, P < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, DV trauma patients had 2.1 higher odds of mortality (aOR: 2.31, P < 0.001). DV trauma patients were also associated with a $1516 increase in emergency department charges compared with non-DV trauma patients (95% CI: $1489-$1,542, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Injuries related to all types of DV are emerging as a public health crisis among both genders. To mitigate under-reporting, it is important to identify at-risk patients and provide them with appropriate resources.

Interhospital variability in time to discharge to rehabilitation among insured trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Hospital costs are partly a function of length of stay (LOS), which can be impacted by the local availability of postacute care (PAC) resources (inpatient rehabilitation and skilled nursing facilities), particularly for injured patients. We hypothesized that LOS for trauma patients destined for PAC would be variable based on insurance type and hospitals from which they are discharged. METHODS: We used the 2014 to 2015 National Inpatient Sample from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. We included all adult admissions with a primary diagnosis of trauma (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes), who were insured and discharged to PAC. We then ranked hospitals based upon mean LOS and divided them into quartiles to determine differences. The primary outcome was inpatient LOS; secondary outcome was cost. RESULTS: There are 958,005 trauma patients that met the inclusion criteria. Mean LOS varied based upon insurance type (Medicaid vs. Private vs. Medicare: 12.7 days vs. 8.8 days and 5.7 days; p < 0.001). Shortest LOS hospitals had a marginal variation in LOS (Medicaid vs. Private vs. Medicare: 5.5 days vs. 4.8 days vs. 4.2 days; p < 0.001). Longest LOS hospitals had mean LOS that varied substantially (16.4 days vs. 11.0 days vs. 6.7 days; p < 0.001). Multivariate regression controlling for patient and hospital characteristics revealed that Medicaid patients spent Medicaid patients spent an additional 0.4 days in shortest LOS hospitals and an additional 2.6 days in longest LOS hospitals (p < 0.001). The average daily cost of inpatient care was US $3,500 (SD, US $132). Even with conservative estimates, Medicaid patients at hospitals without easy access to rehabilitation incur significant additional inpatient costs over $10,000 in some hospitals. CONCLUSION: Prolonged LOS is likely a function of access to postacute facilities, which is largely out of the hands of trauma centers. Efficiencies in care are magnified by access to postacute beds, suggesting that increased availability of rehabilitation facilities, particularly for Medicaid patients, might help to reduce LOS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic, level III; care management, level IV.

The economic footprint of acute care surgery in the United States: Implications for systems development.

BACKGROUND: Acute care surgery (ACS) comprises trauma, surgical critical care, and emergency general surgery (EGS), encompassing both operative and nonoperative conditions. While the burden of EGS and trauma has been separately considered, the global footprint of ACS has not been fully characterized. We sought to characterize the costs and scope of influence of ACS-related conditions. We hypothesized that ACS patients comprise a substantial portion of the US inpatient population. We further hypothesized that ACS patients differ from other surgical and non-surgical patients across patient characteristics. METHODS: We queried the National Inpatient Sample 2014, a nationally representative database for inpatient hospitalizations. To capture all adult ACS patients, we included adult admissions with any International Classification of Diseases-9th Rev.-Clinical Modification diagnosis of trauma or an International Classification of Diseases-9th Rev.-Clinical Modification diagnosis for one of the 16 AAST-defined EGS conditions. Weighted patient data were presented to provide national estimates. RESULTS: Of the 29.2 million adult patients admitted to US hospitals, approximately 5.9 million (20%) patients had an ACS diagnosis. ACS patients accounted for US $85.8 billion, or 25% of total US inpatient costs (US $341 billion). When comparing ACS to non-ACS inpatient populations, ACS patients had higher rates of health care utilization with longer lengths of stay (5.9 days vs. 4.5 days, p < 0.001), and higher mean costs (US $14,466 vs. US $10,951, p < 0.001. Of all inpatients undergoing an operative procedure, 27% were patients with an ACS diagnosis. Overall, 3,186 (70%) of US hospitals cared for both trauma and EGS patients. CONCLUSION: Acute care surgery patients comprise 20% of the inpatient population, but 25% of total inpatient costs in the United States. In addition to being costly, they overall have higher health care utilization and worse outcomes. This suggests that there is an opportunity to improve clinical trajectory for ACS patients that in turn, can affect the overall US health care costs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic, level III.

Financial Stability of Level I Trauma Centers Within Safety-Net Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Level I trauma centers often exist within safety-net hospitals (SNHs), facilities servicing high proportions of low-income and uninsured patients. Given the current health care funding environment, trauma centers within SNHs may be at particular risk. Using California as a model, we hypothesized that SNHs with trauma centers vary in terms of financial stability. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from publicly available financial disclosure reports from California's Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. Safety-net hospitals were identified from the California Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems. The primary outcomes metric for financial performance was operating margin. RESULTS: California hospitals with Level I trauma centers were analyzed (11 SNH sites, 2 non SNH). The SNHs did not behave uniformly, and were clustered into county-owned SNHs (36%, n = 4) and nonprofit-owned SNHs (64%, n = 7). Mean operating margins for county SNHs, nonprofit SNHs, and non SNHs were -16.5%, 8.4%, and 9.5%, respectively (p < 0.001). From 2010 to 2015, operating margins improved for all hospitals, partly due to increases in the percent of insured patients and changes in payer mix. Nonprofit SNHs had a payer mix similar to that of non SNHs; county SNHs had the highest proportions of MediCal (California Medicaid) (45% vs 36% vs 12%, respectively, p < 0.001) and uninsured patients (17% vs 5% vs 0%, respectively, p < 0.001) compared with nonprofit SNHs and non SNHs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The majority (85%) of Level I trauma centers are within SNHs, whose financial stability is highly variable. A group of SNHs rely on infusions of government funds and are therefore susceptible to changes in policy. These findings suggest deliberate funding efforts are critical to protect the health of the US academic trauma system.

Trauma-induced insurance instability: Variation in insurance coverage for patients who experience readmission after injury.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic injuries result in a significant disruption to patients' lives, including their ability to work, which may place patients at risk of losing insurance coverage. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of injury on insurance status. We hypothesized that trauma patients with ongoing health needs experience changes in coverage. METHODS: We used the Nationwide Readmission Database (2013-2014), a nationally representative sample of readmissions in the United States. We included patients aged 27 years to 64 years admitted with any diagnosis of trauma with at least one readmission within 6 months. Patients on Medicare and with missing payer information were excluded. The primary outcome was payer status. RESULTS: 57,281 patients met inclusion criteria, 11,006 (19%) changed insurance payer at readmission. Of these, 21% (n = 2,288) became uninsured, 25% (n = 2,773) gained coverage, and 54% (n = 5,945) switched insurance. Medicaid and Medicare gained the largest fraction of patients (from 16% to 30% and 0% to 18%, respectively), with a decrease in private payer coverage (37% to 17%). In multivariate analysis, patients who were younger (27-35 years vs. 56-64 years; odds ratio [OR], 1.30; p < 0.001); lived in a zip code with average income in the lowest quartile (vs. the highest quartile; OR, 1.37; p < 0.001); and had three or more comorbidities (vs. none; OR, 1.61; p < 0.001) were more likely to experience a change in insurance. CONCLUSION: Approximately one fifth of trauma patients who are readmitted within 6 months of their injury experience a change in insurance coverage. Most switch between insurers, but nearly a quarter lose their insurance. The government adopts a large fraction of these patients, indicating a growing reliance on government programs like Medicaid. Trauma patients face challenges after injury, and a change in insurance may add to this burden. Future policy and quality improvement initiatives should consider addressing this challenge. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic, level III.

A geospatial evaluation of timely access to surgical care in seven countries.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the consistent availability of basic surgical resources at selected facilities in seven countries. METHODS: In 2010-2014, we used a situational analysis tool to collect data at district and regional hospitals in Bangladesh (n = 14), the Plurinational State of Bolivia (n = 18), Ethiopia (n = 19), Guatemala (n = 20), the Lao People's Democratic Republic (n = 12), Liberia (n = 12) and Rwanda (n = 25). Hospital sites were selected by pragmatic sampling. Data were geocoded and then analysed using an online data visualization platform. Each hospital's catchment population was defined as the people who could reach the hospital via a vehicle trip of no more than two hours. A hospital was only considered to show consistent availability of basic surgical resources if clean water, electricity, essential medications including intravenous fluids and at least one anaesthetic, analgesic and antibiotic, a functional pulse oximeter, a functional sterilizer, oxygen and providers accredited to perform surgery and anaesthesia were always available. FINDINGS: Only 41 (34.2%) of the 120 study hospitals met the criteria for the provision of consistent basic surgical services. The combined catchments of the study hospitals in each study country varied between 3.3 million people in Liberia and 151.3 million people in Bangladesh. However, the combined catchments of the study hospitals in each study country that met the criteria for the provision of consistent basic surgical services were substantially smaller and varied between 1.3 million in Liberia and 79.2 million in Bangladesh. CONCLUSION: Many study facilities were deficient in the basic infrastructure necessary for providing basic surgical care on a consistent basis.

The American College of Surgeons Needs-Based Assessment of Trauma Systems: Estimates for the State of California.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma convened a consensus conference to develop the Needs-Based Assessment of Trauma Systems (NBATS) tool to assist in determining the number of trauma centers required for a region. We tested the performance of NBATS with respect to the optimal number of trauma centers needed by region in California. METHODS: Trauma center data were obtained from the California Emergency Services Authority Information Systems (CEMSIS). Numbers of admitted trauma patients (ISS > 15) were obtained using statewide nonpublic admissions data from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), CEMSIS, and data from local emergency medical service agency (LEMSA) directors who agreed to participate in a telephone survey. Population estimates per county for 2014 were obtained from the U.S. Census. NBATS criteria used included population, transport time, community support, and number of discharges for severely injured patients (ISS > 15) at nontrauma centers and trauma centers. Estimates for the number of trauma centers per region were created for each of the three data sources and compared to the number of existing centers. RESULTS: A total of 62 state-designated trauma centers were identified for California: 13 (21%) Level I, 36 (58%) Level II, and 13 (11%) Level III. NBATS estimates for the total number of trauma centers in California were 27% to 47% lower compared to the number of trauma centers in existence, but this varied based on urban/rural status. NBATS estimates were lower than the current state in 70% of urban areas but were higher in almost 90% of rural areas. All data sources (OSHPD, CEMSIS, local data) produced similar results. CONCLUSION: Estimates from the NBATS tool are different from what is currently in existence in California, and differences exist based on whether the region is rural or urban. Findings from the current study can help inform future iterations of the NBATS tool. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic, level V.