RESUMEN
Access to quality hospital care is a persistent problem for rural patients. Little is known about disparities between rural and urban populations regarding in-hospital outcomes for end-stage liver disease (ESLD) patients. We aimed to determine whether rural ESLD patients experienced higher in-hospital mortality than urban patients and whether disparities were attributable to the rurality of the patient or the center. This was a retrospective study of patient admissions in the National Inpatient Sample, a population-based sample of hospitals in the United States. Admissions were included if they were from adult patients who had an ESLD-related admission defined by codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, between January 2012 and December 2014. The primary exposures of interest were patient-level rurality and hospital-level rurality. The main outcome was in-hospital mortality. We stratified our analysis by disease severity score. After accounting for patient- and hospital-level covariates, ESLD admissions to rural hospitals in every category of disease severity had significantly higher odds of in-hospital mortality than patient admissions to urban hospitals. Those with moderate or major risk of dying had more than twice the odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] for moderate risk, 2.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.62-3.59; OR for major risk, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.97-3.14). There was no association between patient-level rurality and mortality in the adjusted models. In conclusion, ESLD patients admitted to rural hospitals had increased odds of in-hospital mortality compared with those admitted to urban hospitals, and the differences were not attributable to patient-level rurality. Our results suggest that interventions to improve outcomes in this population should focus on the level of the health system.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/mortalidad , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales Rurales/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales Urbanos/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/terapia , Femenino , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/organización & administración , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Estudios Retrospectivos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Readmission within 30 days of hospital discharge is common and costly among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Little is known about long-term outcomes after readmission. We estimated the association between hospital admissions and readmissions in the first year of dialysis and outcomes in the second year. METHODS: Data on incident dialysis patients with Medicare coverage were obtained from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). Readmission patterns were summarized as no admissions in the first year of dialysis (Admit-), at least one admission but no readmissions within 30 days (Admit+/Readmit-), and admissions with at least one readmission within 30 days (Admit+/Readmit+).We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association between readmission pattern and mortality, hospitalization, and kidney transplantation, accounting for demographic and clinical covariates. RESULTS: Among the 128,593 Medicare ESRD patients included in the study, 18.5% were Admit+/Readmit+, 30.5% were Admit+/Readmit-, and 51.0% were Admit-. Readmit+/Admit+ patients had substantially higher long-term risk of mortality (HR = 3.32 (95% CI, 3.21-3.44)), hospitalization (HR = 4.46 (95% CI, 4.36-4.56)), and lower likelihood of kidney transplantation (HR = 0.52 (95% CI, 0.44-0.62)) compared to Admit- patients; these associations were stronger than those among Admit+/Readmit- patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with readmissions in the first year of dialysis were at substantially higher risk of poor outcomes than either patients who had no admissions or patients who had hospital admissions but no readmissions. Identifying strategies to both prevent readmission and mitigate risk among patients who had a readmission may improve outcomes among this substantial, high-risk group of ESRD patients.
Asunto(s)
Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Diálisis Renal , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosAsunto(s)
Índice de Masa Corporal , Causas de Muerte , Neoplasias/mortalidad , Neoplasias/terapia , Obesidad/complicaciones , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Terapia Combinada , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias/patología , Obesidad/diagnóstico , Pronóstico , Radioterapia Adyuvante , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Medición de Riesgo , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Operativos/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Operativos/métodos , Análisis de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Pérdida de PesoRESUMEN
The purpose of this study was to examine the career paths of alumni from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program (CPFP), a structured in-house postdoctoral training program of 3-4 years duration, and specifically what proportion of the alumni were currently performing cancer prevention-related activities. The analyses here included 119 CPFP alumni and 85 unsuccessful CPFP applicants, all of whom completed postdoctoral training between 1987-2011 and are currently employed. Postdoctoral training experiences and current career outcomes data were collected via online surveys. Differences between groups were assessed using chi-square and Fisher's exact test p-values and subsequent regression analyses adjusted for differences between the groups. Compared to 15.3% of unsuccessful CPFP applicants, 52.1% of CPFP alumni (odds ratio [OR] = 4.99, 95% confidence interval [95% CI): 1.91-13.0) were currently spending the majority of their time working in cancer prevention. Among those doing any cancer prevention-focused work, 54.3% of CPFP alumni spent the majority of their time performing cancer prevention research activities when compared to 25.5% of unsuccessful applicants (OR = 4.26, 95% CI: 1.38-13.2). In addition to the independent effect of the NCI CPFP, scientific discipline, and employment sector were also associated with currently working in cancer prevention and involvement in cancer prevention research-related activities. These results from a structured postdoctoral training program are relevant not only to the cancer prevention community but also to those interested in evaluating alignment of postdoctoral training programs with available and desired career paths more broadly.