Mental Health Burden After Injury: It's About More than Just Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after injury and their association with long-term functional outcomes. BACKGROUND: Mental health disorders (MHD) after injury have been associated with worse long-term outcomes. However, prior studies almost exclusively focused on PTSD. METHODS: Trauma patients with an injury severity score ≥9 treated at 3 Level-I trauma centers were contacted 6-12 months post-injury to screen for anxiety (generalized anxiety disorder-7), depression (patient health questionnaire-8), PTSD (8Q-PCL-5), pain, and functional outcomes (trauma quality of life instrument, and short-form health survey)). Associations between mental and physical outcomes were established using adjusted multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of the 531 patients followed, 108 (20%) screened positive for any MHD: of those who screened positive for PTSD (7.9%, N = 42), all had co-morbid depression and/or anxiety. In contrast, 66 patients (12.4%) screened negative for PTSD but positive for depression and/or anxiety. Compared to patients with no MHD, patients who screened positive for PTSD were more likely to have chronic pain {odds ratio (OR): 8.79 [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.21, 24.08]}, functional limitations [OR: 7.99 (95% CI: 3.50, 18.25)] and reduced physical health [ß: -9.3 (95% CI: -13.2, -5.3)]. Similarly, patients who screened positive for depression/anxiety (without PTSD) were more likely to have chronic pain [OR: 5.06 (95% CI: 2.49, 10.46)], functional limitations [OR: 2.20 (95% CI: 1.12, 4.32)] and reduced physical health [ß: -5.1 (95% CI: -8.2, -2.0)] compared to those with no MHD. CONCLUSIONS: The mental health burden after injury is significant and not limited to PTSD. Distinguishing among MHD and identifying symptom-clusters that overlap among these diagnoses, may help stratify risk of poor outcomes, and provide opportunities for more focused screening and treatment interventions.

The Obesity Paradox in Elderly Patients Undergoing Emergency Surgery: A Nationwide Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity has long been considered a risk factor for postoperative adverse events in surgery. We sought to study the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the clinical outcomes of the high-risk emergency general surgery (EGS) elderly patients. METHODS: All EGS ≥65 years old patients in the 2007-2016 ACS-NSQIP database, identified using the variables 'emergency' and 'surgspec,' were included. Patients were classified into five groups: normal weight: BMI <25 kg/m2, overweight: BMI ≥25 kg/m2 and <30 kg/m2, Class I: BMI ≥30 kg/m2 and <35 kg/m2, Class II: BMI ≥35 kg/m2 and <40 kg/m2, and Class III: BMI ≥40 kg/m2. Patients with BMI<18.5 kg/m2 were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to assess the relationship between obesity and 30-day postoperative mortality, overall morbidity, and individual postoperative complications after adjusting for demographics (e.g., age, gender), comorbidities (e.g., diabetes mellitus, heart failure), laboratory tests (e.g., white blood cell count, albumin), and operative complexity (e.g., ASA classification). RESULTS: A total of 78,704 patients were included, of which 26,011 were overweight (33.1%), 13,897 (17.6%) had Class I obesity, 5904 (7.5%) had Class II obesity, and 4490 (5.7%) had Class III obesity. On multivariable analyses, compared to the nonobese, patients who are overweight or with Class I-III obesity paradoxically had a lower risk of mortality, bleeding requiring transfusion, pneumonia, stroke and myocardial infarction (MI). Additionally, the incidence of MI and stroke decreased in a stepwise fashion as BMI progressed from overweight to severely obese (MI: OR: 0.84 [0.73-0.95], OR: 0.73 [0.62-0.86], OR: 0.66 [0.52-0.83], OR: 0.51 [0.38-0.68]; stroke: OR: 0.80 [0.65-0.99], OR: 0.79 [0.62-1.02], OR: 0.71 [0.50-1.00], OR: 0.43 [0.28-0.68]). CONCLUSION: In our study of elderly EGS patients, overweight and obese patients had a lower risk of mortality, bleeding requiring transfusion, pneumonia, reintubation, stroke, and MI. Further studies are needed to confirm and investigate the obesity paradox in this patient population.

General Versus Neuraxial Anesthesia for Appendectomy: A Multicenter International Study.

BACKGROUND: In resource-limited countries, open appendectomy is still performed under general anesthesia (GA) or neuraxial anesthesia (NA). We sought to compare the postoperative outcomes of appendectomy under NA versus GA. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing (iPOP) multicenter study. All patients ≥ 16 years-old who underwent an open appendectomy between October 2016 and March 2017 in one of the 14 participating hospitals were included. Patients were stratified into two groups: NA-defined as spinal or epidural-and GA. All-cause morbidity, hospital length of stay (LOS), and pain severity were assessed using univariate analysis followed by multivariable logistic regression adjusting for the following preoperative characteristics: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), smoking, history of opioid use, emergency status, and country. RESULTS: A total of 655 patients were included, 353 of which were in the NA group and 302 in the GA group. The countries operating under NA were Colombia (39%), Thailand (31%), China (23%), and Brazil (7%). Overall, NA patients were younger (mean age (SD): 34.5 (14.4) vs. 40.7 (17.9), p-value < 0.001) and had a lower BMI (mean (SD): 23.5 (3.8) vs. 24.3 (5.2), p-value = 0.040) than GA patients. On multivariable analysis, NA was independently associated with less postoperative complications (OR, 95% CI: 0.30 [0.10-0.94]) and shorter hospital LOS (LOS > 3 days, OR, 95% CI: 0.47 [0.32-0.68]) compared to GA. There was no difference in postoperative pain severity between the two techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Open appendectomy performed under NA is associated with improved outcomes compared to that performed under GA. Further randomized controlled studies should examine the safety and value of NA in lower abdominal surgery.

Opioids After Surgery in the United States Versus the Rest of the World: The International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing (iPOP) Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing study compares postoperative opioid prescribing patterns in the United States (US) versus the rest of the world. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The US is in the middle of an unprecedented opioid epidemic. Diversion of unused opioids contributes to the opioid epidemic. METHODS: Patients ≥16 years old undergoing appendectomy, cholecystectomy, or inguinal hernia repair in 14 hospitals from 8 countries during a 6-month period were included. Medical records were systematically reviewed to identify: (1) preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics, (2) opioid intake within 3 months preoperatively, (3) opioid prescription upon discharge, and (4) opioid refills within 3 months postoperatively. The median/range and mean/standard deviation of number of pills and OME were compared between the US and non-US patients. RESULTS: A total of 4690 patients were included. The mean age was 49 years, 47% were female, and 4% had opioid use history. Ninety-one percent of US patients were prescribed opioids, compared to 5% of non-US patients (P < 0.001). The median number of opioid pills and OME prescribed were 20 (0-135) and 150 (0-1680) mg for US versus 0 (0-50) and 0 (0-600) mg for non-US patients, respectively (both P < 0.001). The mean number of opioid pills and OME prescribed were 23.1 ±â€Š13.9 in US and 183.5 ±â€Š133.7 mg versus 0.8 ±â€Š3.9 and 4.6 ±â€Š27.7 mg in non-US patients, respectively (both P < 0.001). Opioid refill rates were 4.7% for US and 1.0% non-US patients (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: US physicians prescribe alarmingly high amounts of opioid medications postoperatively. Further efforts should focus on limiting opioid prescribing and emphasize non-opioid alternatives in the US.

Association between alcohol intoxication and mortality in severe traumatic brain injury in the emergency department: a retrospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: Acute alcohol intoxication is very common in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Whether there is an independent association between alcohol intoxication and mortality is debated. This study hypothesized that alcohol intoxication is independently associated with less mortality after severe TBI (sTBI). METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study included all patients with sTBI [head-Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS) ≥3, corresponding to serious head injury or worse] admitted from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2016 in an academic level I trauma center. Patients were classified as with alcohol intoxication or without intoxication based on blood alcohol concentration or description of alcohol intoxication on admission. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analysis, including patient and injury characteristics, was used to assess independent association with alcohol intoxication. RESULTS: Of the 2865 TBI patients, 715 (25%) suffered from alcohol intoxication. They were younger (mean age 46 vs. 68 years), more often male (80 vs. 57%) and had a lower median Glasgow Coma Scale upon arrival (14 vs. 15) compared to the no-intoxication group. There was no difference in injury severity by head AIS or Rotterdam CT. Alcohol intoxication had an unadjusted association with in-hospital mortality [unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.38-0.68]; however, there was no independent association after adjusting for potentially confounding patient and injury characteristics (adjusted OR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.48-1.09). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, there was no independent association between alcohol intoxication and higher in-hospital mortality in emergency patients with sTBI.

Reduced chronic pain: Another benefit of recovery at an inpatient rehabilitation facility over a skilled nursing facility?

BACKGROUND: We sought to compare outcomes 6-12 months post-injury between patients discharged to an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) and a skilled nursing facility (SNF). METHODS: Trauma patients admitted to 3 Level-I trauma centers were interviewed to evaluate the presence of daily pain requiring medication, functional outcomes, and physical and mental health-related quality-of-life at 6-12 months post-injury. Inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting (IPTW)-adjusted analyses were performed to compare outcomes between patients who were discharged to IRF vs SNF. RESULTS: A total of 519 patients were included: 389 discharged to IRFs and 130 to SNFs. In adjusted analyses, IRF was associated with a significant reduction in the likelihood of chronic pain after injury (28.3% vs. 44.7%; OR:0.49; 95% CI, 0.26-0.91; P = .02). However, there were no significant differences in functional outcome or SF-12 composite scores between groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that injured patients discharged to an IRF as compared to a SNF had less chronic pain and analgesic use.

Pain or No Pain, We Will Give You Opioids: Relationship Between Number of Opioid Pills Prescribed and Severity of Pain after Operation in US vs Non-US Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients in the US receive disproportionally higher amounts of opioids after operations compared with their non-US counterparts. We aimed to assess the relationship between perceived pain severity after operation and the amount of opioid medications prescribed at discharge in US vs non-US patients. METHODS: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing multicenter study. Patients 16 years and older who underwent appendectomy, cholecystectomy, or inguinal herniorrhaphy in 1 of 14 participating hospitals across 8 countries between October 2016 and March 2017 were included. In hospitals where pain severity was assessed using a 0 to 10 visual analog scale before hospital discharge, patients were stratified into the following groups, depending on the pain severity: none, mild (1 to 3), moderate (4 to 6), and severe (7 to 10). The number of opioid prescriptions, total number of pills, and oral morphine equivalents prescribed were calculated for each group and US and non-US patients were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2,024 patients were included. Eighty-three percent of US patients without pain were prescribed opioids compared with 8.7% of non-US patients without pain (p < 0.001). The number of opioid prescriptions, number of pills, and oral morphine equivalents prescribed were similar across the 4 pain severity groups in US patients (p > 0.05). In contrast, the number of opioid prescriptions, number of opioid pills, and oral morphine equivalents prescribed among non-US patients were incrementally higher as the pain severity progressed from no pain to severe pain (all, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: US patients are prescribed opioids at high rates and doses regardless of pain severity. Additional efforts should be directed toward tailoring opioid prescriptions to patients' needs.

Design and Impact of a Novel Surgery-Specific Second Victim Peer Support Program.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons are prone to feelings of sadness, guilt, and anxiety when involved in major adverse events. We aimed to create and evaluate a second victim peer support program for surgeons and surgical trainees. STUDY DESIGN: The second victim peer support program was an intervention performed in the Department of Surgery at a tertiary care academic medical center. Surgical attendings and trainees participated as peer supporters or affected peers. In this article, we describe the design of the program and its 1-year impact, which was evaluated through the number of interventions attempted and realized and feedback received from all participants using an anonymous qualitative and quantitative survey. RESULTS: The program was established using the following 5 steps: creation of a conceptual framework, choice of peer supporters, training of peer supporters, multifaceted identification of major adverse events, and design of a systematic intervention plan. In 1 year, the program had 47 interventions distributed evenly between attendings and trainees; 19% of affected peers opted out of receiving support. Most participants expressed satisfaction with the program's confidentiality, the safe/trusting environment it provided, and the timeliness of the intervention (89%, 73%, and 83%, respectively); 81% suggested that the program had a positive impact on the department's "safety and support" culture and would recommend the program to a colleague. Several areas for improvement were identified, including the need to improve identification of events requiring outreach, and the desire for increased awareness of the program throughout the department. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully designed, implemented, and assessed the impact of the first surgery-specific peer support program in the US. Our 1-year experience suggests that the program is highly used and well received, albeit with opportunities for improvement.

The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index is a powerful predictor of adverse outcome in the elderly emergency surgery patient.

BACKGROUND: The degree to which malnutrition impacts perioperative outcomes in the elderly emergency surgery (ES) patient remains unknown. We aimed to study the relationship between malnutrition, as measured by the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), and postoperative outcomes in elderly patients undergoing ES. METHODS: Using the 2007 to 2016 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, all patients 65 years or older undergoing ES were included in our study. The GNRI, defined as (1.489 × albumin [g/L]) + (41.7 × [weight/ideal weight]) was calculated for each patient in the database. Patients with missing height, weight, or preoperative albumin data were excluded. Patients were divided into four malnutrition groups: very severe (GNRI < 73), severe (GNRI, 73-82), moderate (GNRI, 82-92), and mild (GNRI, 92-98). Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index greater than 98 constituted the normal nutrition group. Risk-adjusted multivariable logistic regressions were performed to study the relationship between malnutrition-measured using either GNRI, albumin level, or body mass index less than 18.5 kg/m-and the following postoperative outcomes: 30-day mortality, 30-day morbidity (including infectious and noninfectious complications), and hospital length of stay. The relationship between GNRI score and 30-day mortality for six common ES procedures was then assessed. RESULTS: A total of 82,725 patients were included in the final analyses. Of these, 55,214 were malnourished with GNRI less than 98 (66.74%). Risk-adjusted multivariable analyses showed that, as malnutrition worsened from mild to very severe, the risk of mortality, morbidity, and the hospital length of stay progressively increased (all p < 0.05). Patients with very severe malnutrition had at least a twofold increased likelihood of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.57-3.03), deep vein thrombosis (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.77-2.42), and respiratory failure (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.81-2.11). Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index predicted mortality better than albumin or body mass index alone for ES. CONCLUSION: Malnutrition, measured using GNRI, is a strong independent predictor of adverse outcomes in the elderly ES patient and could be used to assess the nutrition status and counsel patients (and families) preoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, Level IV.

Impact of Intra-Operative Adverse Events on the Risk of Surgical Site Infection in Abdominal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Intra-operative adverse events (iAEs) recently were shown to correlate independently with an increased risk of post-operative death, morbidity, re-admissions, and length of hospital stay. We sought to understand further the impact of iAEs on surgical site infections (SSIs) in abdominal surgical procedures and delineate which patient populations are most affected. We hypothesized that all patients with iAEs have an increased risk for SSI, especially those with pre-existing risk factors for SSI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To identify iAEs, a well-described three-step methodology was used: (1) the 2007-2012 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was merged with the administrative database of our tertiary academic center, (2) the merged database was screened for iAEs in abdominal surgical procedures using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification-based Patient Safety Indicator "Accidental Puncture/Laceration," and (3) each flagged record was systematically reviewed to confirm iAE occurrence. Uni-variable and backward stepwise multi-variable analyses (adjusting for demographics, co-morbidities, type and complexity of operation) were performed to study the independent correlation between iAEs and SSIs (superficial, deep incisional, and organ-space). The correlation between iAEs and SSIs was investigated especially in patients deemed a priori at high risk for SSIs, specifically those older than age 60 and those with diabetes mellitus, obesity, cigarette smoking, steroid use, or American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥III. RESULTS: A total of 9,288 operations were included, and iAEs were detected in 183 (2.0%). Most iAEs consisted of bowel (44%) or vessel (29%) injuries and were addressed intra-operatively (92%). SSI occurred in 686 (7.4%) cases and included 331 (3.5%) superficial, 32 (0.34%) deep incisional, and 333 (3.6%) organ/space infections. iAEs were correlated independently with SSI (odds ratio [OR] = 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-2.52, p = 0.013), and more severe iAEs were associated with a higher risk of infection. Analysis by SSI type revealed a significant association with organ/space SSI (OR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.07-3.05; p = 0.027), but not incisional infections. Most interestingly, the occurrence of an iAE was correlated with increased SSI rate in the low-risk but not the high-risk patient populations. Specifically, iAEs increased SSI in patients younger than 60 (OR = 2.69, 95% CI 1.55-4.67, p < 0.001), non-diabetic patients (OR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.04-2.58, p = 0.034), non-obese patients (OR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.81-4.66, p < 0.001), non-smokers (OR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.08-2.6, p = 0.022), with no steroid use (OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.15-2.6, p < 0.008), and with ASA class

Life after 90: Predictors of mortality and performance of the ACS-NSQIP risk calculator in 4,724 nonagenarian patients undergoing emergency general surgery.

BACKGROUND: The decision to emergently operate on nonagenarian patients (NONAs) can be complex due to the uncertainty about outcomes and goals of care at this advanced age. We sought to study: (1) the outcomes and predictors of mortality for NONAs undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) and (2) the accuracy of ACS-NSQIP mortality risk calculator in this special population. METHODS: Using the 2007 to 2015 ACS-NSQIP database, we included all patients older than 90 years of age who underwent an emergent operation with a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code for "digestive system." Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of 30-day mortality. NONAs' mortality rates for different combinations of risk factors were also studied and compared to the ACS-NSQIP calculator-predicted mortality rates. RESULTS: Out of a total of 4,456,809 patients, 4,724 NONAs were included. The overall 30-day patient mortality and morbidity rates were 21% and 45%, respectively. In multivariable analyses, several independent predictors of 30-day mortality were identified, including recent history of weight loss, history of steroid use, smoking, functional dependence, hypoalbuminemia and sepsis or septic shock. The mortality among NONAs with a history of steroid use and a recent history of weight loss was 100%. Similarly, the mortality of NONAs with recent history of weight loss who presented with preoperative septic shock was 93%. The ACS-NSQIP calculator significantly and consistently underestimated the risk of mortality in all NONAs undergoing EGS. CONCLUSION: Most NONAs undergoing EGS survive the hospital stay and the first 30 postoperative days, even in the presence of significant preexisting comorbidities. However, the combination of recent weight loss with either steroid use or septic shock nearly ensures mortality and should be used in the discussions with patients and families before a decision to operate is made. The ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator should be used with caution in these high-risk patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Can the emergency surgery score (ESS) be used as a triage tool predicting the postoperative need for an ICU admission?

BACKGROUND: The emergency surgery score (ESS) is a preoperative risk calculator recently validated as a mortality predictor in emergency surgery (ES) patients. We sought to evaluate the utility of ESS as an ICU admission triage tool. METHODS: A four-step methodology was designed. First, the 2007-2015 ACS-NSQIP database was examined to identify all ES patients using the "emergent" variable and CPT codes for "digestive system". Second, we created a composite variable called ICUneed, defined as death or the development of one or more postoperative complication warranting critical care (e.g. unplanned intubation, ventilator dependent ≥48 h, cardiac arrest, septic shock and coma ≥24 h). Third, for each patient, ESS was calculated. Fourth, the correlation between ESS and ICUneed was assessed by calculating the model c-statistics (AUROC). RESULTS: Out of a total of 4,456,809 patients, 65,989 patients were included. The mean population age was 56 years; 51% were female, and 71% were white. The overall 30-day postoperative mortality and morbidity were 8.2% and 31.7%, respectively. ESS gradually and accurately predicted ICUneed, with 1%, 40% and 98% of patients with ESS of 2, 9 and 16 requiring critical care, respectively. Only 6.2% of patients with ESS ≤7 had an ICUneed, while 97.2% of patients with ESS ≥15 had an ICUneed. The c-statistic of the predictive model was 0.90. CONCLUSIONS: ESS accurately predicts the need for postoperative critical care and ICU admission. In resource-limited settings, ESS may prove useful as an ICU triage tool ensuring a prompt rescue of the clinically deteriorating patient without unnecessary and burdensome ICU admissions.

The impact of in-hospital complications on the long-term functional outcome of trauma patients: A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term consequences of in-hospital complications remain largely unknown. We sought to study the effect of complications on the long-term functional outcome of trauma patients. METHODS: Patients with an Injury Severity Score ≥ 9 admitted to 3, level I trauma centers between 2015 and 2017 were contacted 6 to 12 months postinjury and administered a validated trauma quality-of-life survey, assessing for the presence of any functional limitation. Functional limitation was defined as the inability to perform independently one or more activities of daily living (eg, driving, walking on flat surfaces/upstairs, dressing). Medical records and the trauma registry were reviewed systematically for all patient and injury variables. The occurrence of predefined in-hospital complications (eg, pneumonia, surgical site infection) was recorded. The impact of in-hospital complications on functional limitation was assessed using multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 1,709 patients, 1,022 completed the study. The mean age was 58 y, 56% were male, 94% had blunt trauma, and the mean Injury Severity Score was 15. A total of 168 patients (16.4%) had a minimum of 1 in-hospital complication and reported significantly more functional limitations in most activities of daily living at 6 to 12 months, compared with those without complications. In multivariable analyses adjusting for confounders, the occurrence of complications was associated with a greater likelihood of functional limitation 6 to 12 months postinjury (odds ratio = 1.82, 95% confidence interval 1.22-2.69, P = .003). CONCLUSION: Trauma patients with in-hospital complications have a worse long-term functional outcome. In addition to prevention of primary complications, more rehabilitation resources should be made available to trauma patients who survive complications.

Most of the variation in length of stay in emergency general surgery is not related to clinical factors of patient care.

BACKGROUND: Hospital length of stay (LOS) is currently recognized as a key quality indicator. We sought to investigate how much of the LOS variation in the high-risk group of patients undergoing Emergency general surgery could be explained by clinical versus nonclinical factors. METHODS: Using the 2007 to 2015 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database, we included all patients who underwent an emergency appendectomy, cholecystectomy, colectomy, small intestine resection, enterolysis, or hernia repair. American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program defines emergency surgery as one that is performed no later than 12 hours after admission or symptom onset. Using all the ACS-NSQIP demographic, preoperative (comorbidities, laboratory variables), intraoperative (e.g., duration of surgery, wound classification), and postoperative variables (i.e., complications), we created multivariable linear regression models to predict LOS. LOS was treated as a continuous variable, and the degree to which the models could explain the variation in LOS for each type of surgery was measured using the coefficient of determination (R). RESULTS: A total of 215,724 patients were included. The mean age was 47.1 years; 52.0% were female. In summary, the median LOS ranged between 1 day for appendectomies (n = 124, 426) and cholecystectomies (n = 21,699) and 8 days for colectomies (n = 19,557) and small intestine resections (n = 7,782). The R for all clinical factors ranged between 0.28 for cholecystectomy and 0.44 for hernia repair, suggesting that 56% to 72% of the LOS variation for each of the six procedures studied cannot be explained by the wide range of clinical factors included in ACS-NSQIP. CONCLUSION: Most of the LOS variation is not explained by clinical factors and may be explained by nonclinical factors (e.g., logistical delays, insurance type). Further studies should evaluate these nonclinical factors to identify target areas for quality improvement. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological study, level III.

Obesity as protective against, rather than a risk factor for, postoperative Clostridium difficile infection: A nationwide retrospective analysis of 1,426,807 surgical patients.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that obesity is a risk factor for Clostridium difficile infection, possibly due to disruptions in the intestinal microbiome composition. We hypothesized that body mass index (BMI) is associated with increased incidence of C. difficile infection in surgical patients. METHODS: In this nationwide retrospective cohort study in 680 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participating sites across the United States, the occurrence of C. difficile infection within 30 days postoperatively between different BMI groups was compared. All American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program patients between 2015 and 2016 were classified as underweight, normal-weight, overweight, or obese class I-III if their BMI was less than 18.5, 18.5 to 25, 25 to 30, 30 to 35, 35 to 40 or greater than 40, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 1,426,807 patients were included; median age was 58 years, 43.4% were male, and 82.9% were white. The postoperative incidence of C. difficile infection was 0.42% overall: 1.11%, 0.56%, 0.39%, 0.35%, 0.33% and 0.36% from the lowest to the highest BMI group, respectively (p < 0.001 for trend). In univariate then multivariable logistic regression analyses, adjusting for patient demographics (e.g., age, sex), comorbidities (e.g., diabetes, systemic sepsis, immunosuppression), preoperative laboratory values (e.g., albumin, white blood cell count), procedure complexity (work relative unit as a proxy) and procedure characteristics (e.g., emergency, type of surgery [general, vascular, other]), compared with patients with normal BMI, high BMI was inversely and incrementally correlated with the postoperative occurrence of C. difficile infection. The underweight were at increased risk (odds ratio, 1.15 [1.00-1.32]) while the class III obese were at the lowest risk (odds ratio, 0.73 [0.65-0.81]). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide retrospective cohort study, obesity is independently and in a stepwise fashion associated with a decreased risk of postoperative C. difficile infection. Further studies are warranted to explore the potential and unexpected association. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/Epidemiologic, Level IV.

Emergency Surgery Score Accurately Predicts the Risk of Post-Operative Infection in Emergency General Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) was validated recently as an accurate and user-friendly post-operative mortality risk calculator specific for Emergency General Surgery (EGS). ESS is calculated by adding one to three integer points for each of 22 pre-operative variables (demographics, co-morbidities, and pre-operative laboratory values); increasing scores accurately and gradually predict higher mortality rates. We sought to evaluate whether ESS can predict the occurrence of post-operative infectious complications in EGS patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2007-2015, all EGS patients were identified by using the "emergent" ACS-NSQIP variable and a concomitant surgery Current Procedural Terminology code for "digestive system." Patients with any missing ESS variables or those who died within 72 hours from the surgical procedure were excluded. A composite variable, post-operative infection, was created and defined as the post-operative occurrence of one or more of the following: superficial, deep incisional or organ/space surgical site infection, surgical site disruption, pneumonia, sepsis, septic shock, or urinary tract infection. ESS was calculated for all included patients, and the correlation between ESS and post-operative infection was examined using c-statistics. RESULTS: Of a total of 4,456,809 patients, 90,412 patients were included. The mean age of the population was 56 years, 51% were female, and 70% were white; 22% developed one or more post-operative infections, most commonly sepsis/septic shock (12.2%), surgical site infection (9%), and pneumonia (5.7%). The ESS gradually and consistently predicted infectious complications; post-operative infections developed in 7%, 24%, and 49% of patients with an ESS of 1, 5, and 10, respectively. The c-statistics for overall post-operative infection, post-operative sepsis/septic shock, and pneumonia were 0.73, 0.75, and 0.80, respectively. CONCLUSION: The ESS accurately predicts the occurrence of post-operative infectious complications in EGS patients and could be used for pre-operative clinical decision-making as well as quality benchmarking of infection rates in EGS.

Are surgeons reluctant to accurately report intraoperative adverse events? A prospective study of 1,989 patients.

BACKGROUND: The true incidence of intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) remains unknown. METHODS: All patients undergoing abdominal surgery at an academic institution between January and July 2016 were included in a prospective fashion. At the end of surgery, using a secure REDCap database, the surgeon was given the Institute of Medicine definition of intraoperative adverse events and asked whether an intraoperative adverse event had occurred. Blinded reviewers systematically examined all operative reports for intraoperative adverse events and their severity. The response rate and the intraoperative adverse event rate reported by surgeons were calculated. The latter was compared with the rate of intraoperative adverse events detected by operative report review. The severity of intraoperative adverse events was assessed based on a previously validated intraoperative adverse event classification system. RESULTS: A total of 1,989 operations were included. The surgeons' response rate was 71.9%, reporting intraoperative adverse events in 107 operations (7.5%). Of those intraoperative adverse events, 26 (24.3%) were not described in the operative report. Operative report review revealed intraoperative adverse events in 417 operations (21.0%). Most injuries were of lower severity (85.8% were either class I or II). The surgeons' response rate was similar in operations with and without intraoperative adverse events (69.8% versus 72.5%, P=.28), but they underreported low severity intraoperative adverse events-only 13.2% of class I compared with 35.3%, 36.8%, and 55.6% of injury classes II, III, and IV respectively (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Surgeons are willing to report intraoperative adverse events, but systematically and significantly underreport them, especially if they are of lower severity. This is potentially related to the absence of a clear intraoperative adverse event definition or their personal interpretation of their clinical significance.

Variation of Opioid Prescribing Patterns among Patients undergoing Similar Surgery on the Same Acute Care Surgery Service of the Same Institution: Time for Standardization?

BACKGROUND: Diversion of unused prescription opioids is a major contributor to the current United States opioid epidemic. We aimed to study the variation of opioid prescribing in emergency surgery. METHODS: Between October 2016 and March 2017, all patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, or inguinal hernia repair in the acute care surgery service of 1 academic center were included. For each patient, we systematically reviewed the electronic medical record and the prescribing pharmacy platform to identify: (1) history of opioid abuse, (2) opioid intake 3 months preoperatively, (3) number of opioid pills prescribed, (4) prescription of nonopioid pain medications (eg, acetaminophen, ibuprofen), and (5) the need for opioid prescription refills. The mean and range of opioid pills prescribed, as well as their oral morphine equivalent, were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients were included (43.5% laparoscopic appendectomy, 44.3% laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and 12.1% inguinal hernia repair). The mean age was 47.5 years, 52.1% were female, 11.4% had a history of opioid use, and 92.5% received opioid prescriptions upon hospital discharge. Only 70.9% of patients were instructed to use nonopioid pain medications. The mean and range of opioid pills prescribed were 17.4; 0-56 (laparoscopic appendectomy), 17.1; 0-75 (laparoscopic cholecystectomy), and 20.9; 0-50 (inguinal hernia repair), while the range of prescribed oral morphine equivalent was 0-600 mg for laparoscopic appendectomy/laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 0-375 mg for inguinal hernia repair. No patients required any opioid medication refills. CONCLUSION: Even within the same surgical service, wide variation of opioid prescription was observed. Guidelines that standardize pain management may help prevent opioid overprescribing.

The Surgeon as the Second Victim? Results of the Boston Intraoperative Adverse Events Surgeons' Attitude (BISA) Study.

BACKGROUND: An intraoperative adverse event (iAE) is often directly attributable to the surgeon's technical error and/or suboptimal intraoperative judgment. We aimed to examine the psychological impact of iAEs on surgeons as well as the surgeons' attitude about iAE reporting. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of all surgeons at 3 major teaching hospitals of the same university. The 29-item questionnaire was developed using a systematic closed and open approach focused on assessing the surgeons' personal account of iAE incidence, emotional response to iAEs, available support systems, and perspective about the barriers to iAE reporting. RESULTS: The response rate was 44.8% (n = 126). Mean age of respondents was 49 years, 77% were male, and 83% performed >150 procedures/year. During the last year, 32% recalled 1 iAE, 39% recalled 2 to 5 iAEs, and 9% recalled >6 iAEs. The emotional toll of iAEs was significant, with 84% of respondents reporting a combination of anxiety (66%), guilt (60%), sadness (52%), shame/embarrassment (42%), and anger (29%). Colleagues constituted the most helpful support system (42%) rather than friends or family; a few surgeons needed psychological therapy/counseling. As for reporting, 26% preferred not to see their individual iAE rates, and 38% wanted it reported in comparison with their aggregate colleagues' rate. The most common barriers to reporting iAEs were fear of litigation (50%), lack of a standardized reporting system (49%), and absence of a clear iAE definition (48%). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative AEs occur often, have a significant negative impact on surgeons' well-being, and barriers to transparency are fear of litigation and absence of a well-defined reporting system. Efforts should be made to support surgeons and standardize reporting when iAEs occur.

Does the emergency surgery score accurately predict outcomes in emergent laparotomies?

BACKGROUND: The emergency surgery score is a mortality-risk calculator for emergency general operation patients. We sought to examine whether the emergency surgery score predicts 30-day morbidity and mortality in a high-risk group of patients undergoing emergent laparotomy. METHODS: Using the 2011-2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we identified all patients who underwent emergent laparotomy using (1) the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program definition of "emergent," and (2) all Current Procedural Terminology codes denoting a laparotomy, excluding aortic aneurysm rupture. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to measure the correlation (c-statistic) between the emergency surgery score and (1) 30-day mortality, and (2) 30-day morbidity after emergent laparotomy. As sensitivity analyses, the correlation between the emergency surgery score and 30-day mortality was also evaluated in prespecified subgroups based on Current Procedural Terminology codes. RESULTS: A total of 26,410 emergent laparotomy patients were included. Thirty-day mortality and morbidity were 10.2% and 43.8%, respectively. The emergency surgery score correlated well with mortality (c-statistic = 0.84); scores of 1, 11, and 22 correlated with mortalities of 0.4%, 39%, and 100%, respectively. Similarly, the emergency surgery score correlated well with morbidity (c-statistic = 0.74); scores of 0, 7, and 11 correlated with complication rates of 13%, 58%, and 79%, respectively. The morbidity rates plateaued for scores higher than 11. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the emergency surgery score effectively predicts mortality in patients undergoing emergent (1) splenic, (2) gastroduodenal, (3) intestinal, (4) hepatobiliary, or (5) incarcerated ventral hernia operation. CONCLUSION: The emergency surgery score accurately predicts outcomes in all types of emergent laparotomy patients and may prove valuable as a bedside decision-making tool for patient and family counseling, as well as for adequate risk-adjustment in emergent laparotomy quality benchmarking efforts.