Graft Survival and Segment Discards Among Split-Liver and Reduced-Size Transplantations in the United States From 2008 to 2018.

Split-liver transplantation has allocation advantages over reduced-size transplantation because of its ability to benefit 2 recipients. However, prioritization of split-liver transplantation relies on the following 3 major assumptions that have never been tested in the United States: similar long-term transplant recipient outcomes, lower incidence of segment discard among split-liver procurements, and discard of segments among reduced-size procurements that would be otherwise "transplantable." We used United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research data to identify all split-liver (n = 1831) and reduced-size (n = 578) transplantation episodes in the United States between 2008 and 2018. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to compare 7-year all-cause graft loss between cohorts. Secondary analyses included etiology of 30-day all-cause graft loss events as well as the incidence and anatomy of discarded segments. We found no difference in 7-year all-cause graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-1.5) or 30-day all-cause graft loss (aHR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.8) between split-liver and reduced-size cohorts. Vascular thrombosis was the most common etiology of 30-day all-cause graft loss for both cohorts (56.4% versus 61.8% of 30-day graft losses; P = 0.85). Finally, reduced-size transplantation was associated with a significantly higher incidence of segment discard (50.0% versus 8.7%) that were overwhelmingly right-sided liver segments (93.6% versus 30.3%). Our results support the prioritization of split-liver over reduced-size transplantation whenever technically feasible.

Reliability of hospital-level mortality in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The relationship between volume and surgical outcomes has been shown for a variety of surgical procedures. The effects in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair have continued to be debated. Reliability adjustment has been used as a method to remove statistical noise from hospital-level outcomes. However, its impact on aortic aneurysm repair is not well understood. METHODS: We used prospectively collected data from the Vascular Quality Initiative to identify all patients who had undergone abdominal aortic aneurysm repair from 2003 to 2019. We first calculated the hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rates. We subsequently used hierarchical logistic regression modeling to adjust for measurement reliability using empirical Bayes techniques. The effect of volume on risk- and reliability-adjusted mortality rates was then assessed using linear regression. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2019, 67,073 abdominal aortic aneurysms were repaired, of which 11,601 (17.3%) were repaired with an open approach. The median annual volume was 7.4 (interquartile range, 3.0-13.3) for open repairs and 35.4 (interquartile range, 18.8-59.8) for endovascular repairs. Of the 223 hospitals that had performed open repairs during the study period, only 11 (4.9%) had performed ≥15 open repairs annually, and the risk-adjusted mortality rates varied from 0% to 75% across all centers. After reliability adjustment, the variability of the risk-adjusted mortality rates had decreased significantly to 1.3% to 8.2%. The endovascular repair risk-adjusted mortality rate variability had decreased from 0% to 14.3% to 0.3% to 2.8% after reliability adjustment. A decreasing trend in mortality was found with increasing an annual case volume for open repair with each additional annual case associated with a 0.012% decrease in mortality (P = .05); however, the relationship was not significant for endovascular repair (P = .793). CONCLUSIONS: We found that most hospitals do not perform a sufficient number of annual cases to generate a reliable center-specific mortality rate for open aneurysm repair. Center-specific mortality rates for low-volume centers should be viewed with caution, because a substantial proportion of the variation for these outcomes will be statistical noise rather than true center-level differences in the quality of care.

Video is better: why aren't we using it? A mixed-methods study of the barriers to routine procedural video recording and case review.

INTRODUCTION: Video-based case review for minimally invasive surgery is immensely valuable for education and quality improvement. Video review can improve technical performance, shorten the learning curve, disseminate new procedures, and improve learner satisfaction. Despite these advantages, it is underutilized in many institutions. So far, research has focused on the benefits of video, and there is relatively little information on barriers to routine utilization. METHODS: A 36-question survey was developed on video-based case review and distributed to the SAGES email list. The survey included closed and open-ended questions. Numeric responses and Likert scales were compared with t-test; open-ended responses were reviewed qualitatively through rapid thematic analysis to identify themes and sub-themes. RESULTS: 642 people responded to the survey for a response rate of 11%. 584 (91%) thought video would improve the quality of educational conferences. 435 qualitative responses on the value of video were analyzed, and benefits included (1) improved understanding, (2) increased objectivity, (3) better teaching, and (4) better audience engagement. Qualitative comments regarding specific barriers to recording and editing case video identified challenges at all stages of the process, from (1) the decision to record a case, (2) starting the recording in the OR, (3) transferring and storing files, and (4) editing the file. Each step had its own specific challenges. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgeons want to increase their utilization of video-based case review, but there are multiple practical challenges to overcome. Understanding these barriers is essential in order to increase use of video for education and quality improvement.

Perioperative Risks of Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Among Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Review of the MBSAQIP Database.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with CKD experience higher rates of perioperative complications after RYGB compared to sleeve gastrectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: For obese CKD patients who qualify for bariatric surgery, sleeve gastrectomy is often preferred to RYGB based on perceptions of prohibitively-high perioperative risks surrounding RYGB. However, some patients with CKD are not candidates for sleeve gastrectomy and the incremental increased-risk from RYGB has never been rigorously tested in this population. METHODS: CKD patients who underwent RYGB or sleeve gastrectomy between 2015 and 2017 were identified from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Participant Use File. RYGB patients were 1:1 propensity-score matched with sleeve gastrectomy patients based on preoperative factors that influence operative choice. Primary outcomes included 30-day readmissions, surgical complications, medical complications, and death. Secondary outcomes included the individual complications used to create the composite surgical/medical complications. Univariate logistic regression was used to compare outcomes. E-value statistic was used to test the strength of outcome point estimates against possible unmeasured confounding. RESULTS: Demographics were similar between RYGB (n = 673) and sleeve gastrectomy (n = 673) cohorts. There were no statistically significant differences in primary outcomes. Among secondary outcomes, only acute kidney injury was statistically-significantly higher among RYGB patients (4.9% vs 2.7%, P = 0.035, E-value 1.27). CONCLUSIONS: Among well-matched cohorts of RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy patients, incidence of primary outcomes were similar. Among secondary outcomes, only acute kidney injury was statistically-significantly higher among RYGB patients; however, the E-value for this difference was small and relatively weak confounder(s) could abrogate the statistical difference. The perception that RYGB has prohibitively-high perioperative risks among CKD patients is disputable and operative selection should be weighed on patient candidacy and anticipated long-term benefit.

Perioperative risks of bariatric surgery among patients with and without history of solid organ transplant.

Bariatric surgery is effective among patients with previous transplant in limited case series. However, the perioperative safety of bariatric surgery in this patient population is poorly understood. Therefore, we assessed the safety of bariatric surgery among previous-transplant patients using a database that captures >92% of all US bariatric procedures. All primary, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedures between 2017 and 2018 were identified from the MBSAQIP dataset. Patients with previous transplant (n = 610) were compared with patients without previous transplant (n = 321 447). Primary outcomes were 30 day readmissions, surgical complications, medical complications, and death. Multivariable logistic regression with predictive margins was used to compare outcomes. Previous transplant patients experienced higher incidence of readmissions (8.0% vs 3.5%), surgical complications (5.0% vs 2.7%), and medical complications (4.3% vs 1.5%). There was no difference in incidence of death (0.2% vs 0.1%). Among individual complications, there no statistical differences in intraabdominal leak, unplanned reoperation, myocardial infarction, or infectious complications. Baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was found to be a strong moderator of primary outcomes, with the highest risk of complications occurring at the lowest baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate. Given the many long-term benefits of bariatric surgery among patients with previous transplant, our findings should not preclude this patient population from operative consideration.

Population-Based Analysis of Adherence to Postdischarge Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Colorectal Resection.

BACKGROUND: Prevention of venous thromboembolism after colorectal surgery remains challenging. National guidelines endorse thromboembolism prophylaxis for 4 weeks after colorectal cancer resection. Expert consensus favors extended prophylaxis after IBD surgery. The actual frequency of prescription after resection remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess prescription of extended, postdischarge venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after resection in Michigan. DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of elective colorectal resections within a statewide collaborative receiving postdischarge, extended-duration prophylaxis. SETTING: This study was conducted between October 2015 and February 2018 at an academic center. PATIENTS: A total of 5722 patients (2171 with colorectal cancer, 266 with IBD, and 3285 with other). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We compared the prescription of extended, postdischarge prophylaxis over time, between hospitals and by indication. RESULTS: Of 5722 patients, 373 (6.5%) received extended-duration prophylaxis after discharge. Use was similar between patients undergoing surgery for cancer (282/2171, 13.0%) or IBD (31/266, 11.7%, p = 0.54), but was significantly more common for both patients undergoing surgery for cancer or IBD in comparison with patients with other indications (60/3285, 1.8%, p < 0.001). Use increased significantly among patients with cancer (6.8%-16.8%, p < 0.001) and patients with IBD (0%-15.1%, p < 0.05) over the study period. For patients with other diagnoses, use was rare and did not vary significantly (1.5%-2.3%, p = 0.49). Academic centers and large hospitals (>300 beds) were significantly more likely to prescribe extended-duration prophylaxis for all conditions (both p < 0.001), with the majority of prophylaxis concentrated at only a few hospitals. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the lack of assessment of actual adherence, small number of observed venous thromboembolism events, small sample of patients with IBD, and restriction to the state of Michigan. CONCLUSIONS: The use of extended-duration venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after discharge is increasing, but remains uncommon in most hospitals. Efforts to improve adherence may require quality implementation initiatives or targeted payment incentives. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B193. ANÁLISIS POBLACIONAL DE LA ADHERENCIA A LA PROFILAXIS ANTI-TROMBÓTICA EXTENDIDA (TEV) EN PACIENTES DE ALTA LUEGO DE UNA RESECCIÓN COLORECTAL.: La prevención del tromboembolismo venoso después de cirugía colorrectal sigue siendo un desafío. Las guías nacionales han aprobado la profilaxia del tromboembolismo durante cuatro semanas luego de una resección de cáncer colorrectal. El consenso de expertos favorece la profilaxia extendida solamente después de la cirugía por enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal. La frecuencia real de prescripción después de la resección colorrectal sigue siendo desconocida.Evaluar la prescripción de profilaxia prolongada de tromboembolismo venoso después del alta luego de una resección colorrectal en Michigan.Revisión retrospectiva de las resecciones colorrectales electivas seguidas de una profilaxia de larga duración con el apoyo de todo el estado (MI).Este estudio se realizó entre octubre de 2015 y febrero de 2018 en un solo centro académico.Un universo de 5722 pacientes operados (2171 por cáncer colorrectal, 266 por enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, 3285 por otros diagnósticos).Se comparó la prescripción de profilaxia prolongada después del alta según la duración, los hospitales y la indicación.De 5722 pacientes, 373 (6.5%) recibieron profilaxia de duración prolongada después del alta. El uso fue similar entre pacientes sometidos a cirugía por cáncer (282/2171, 13.0%) o enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (31/266, 11.7%, p = 0.54), pero fue significativamente más común para ambos en comparación con pacientes con otras indicaciones (60/3285, 1.8%, p < 0.001). El uso aumentó significativamente entre pacientes con cáncer (6.8% a 16.8% (p < 0.001)) y en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (0% a 15.1%, p < 0.05) durante el período de estudio. Para pacientes con otros diagnósticos, su utilización fue rara y no varió significativamente (1.5% a 2.3%, p = 0.49). Los centros académicos y los grandes hospitales (>300 camas) tenían mayor probabilidad de prescribir la profilaxia de duración extendida en todas las afecciones (ambas p < 0.001), pero la mayoría de las profilaxis se concentraron el algunos pocos grandes hospitales.Este estudio estuvo limitado por la falta de evaluación de actuales adherentes, por el pequeño número de eventos tromboembólicos venosos observados, por la pequeña muestra de pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal y debido a ciertas restricciones en el estado de Michigan.El uso de profilaxia para el tromboembolismo venoso de duración prolongada después del alta está en aumento, pero su uso sigue siendo poco frecuente en la mayoría de los hospitales. Los esfuerzos para mejorar la adherencia al tratamiento pueden requerir iniciativas de mejoría en la calidad o incentivos específicos de reembolso. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B193. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

Going the distance for procurement of donation after circulatory death livers for transplantation-Does reimbursement reflect reality?

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) has increased slowly over the past decade. Given that transplant surgeons generally determine liver offer acceptance, understanding surgeon incentives and disincentives is paramount. The purpose of this study was to assess aggregate travel distance per successful DCD versus deceased after brain death (DBD) liver procurement as a surrogate for surgeon time expenditure and opportunity cost. All consecutive liver offers made to Michigan Medicine from 2006 to 2017 were analyzed. Primary outcome was the summative travel distance (spent on all attempted procurements) per successful liver procurement that resulted in LT. Donation after circulatory death liver offer acceptance was lower than DBD liver offers, as was proportion of successful procurements among accepted offers. Overall, 10 275 miles were travelled for accepted DCD liver offers, resulting in 23 successful procurements (mean 447 miles per successful DCD liver procurement). For accepted DBD liver offers, 197 299 miles were travelled, resulting in 863 successful procurements (mean 229 miles per successful DBD liver procurement). On average, each successful DCD liver procurement required 218 more miles of travel than each successful DBD liver procurement. Current reimbursement policies poorly reflect increased surgeon travel (and time) expenditures between DCD and DBD liver offers.

Bariatric surgery for prospective living kidney donors with obesity?

The obesity epidemic has gripped the transplant community. With nearly 40% of adults in the United States being obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2 ) and 20% being morbidly obese (BMI ≥35 kg/m2 ), the implications for both donors and recipients of solid organs continue to grow.1 Nowhere is this more impactful than the candidacy of living kidney donors (LKDs). As increasing numbers of obese adults present for LKD consideration and evidence of inferior outcomes among obese LKDs grows, transplant surgeons will become progressively challenged by how to manage these patients in the clinic. Therefore, we offer this Personal Viewpoint to the transplant surgery community in order to review the current impact of obesity on living kidney donation, highlight what weight-loss interventions have already been attempted, and discuss the role that referral for weight-loss interventions including bariatric surgery might have going forward.

Electronic messaging and communication with living kidney donors.

New regulations require living kidney donor (LKD) follow-up for 2 years, but donor retention remains poor. Electronic communication (eg, text messaging and e-mail) might improve donor retention. To explore the possible impact of electronic communication, we recruited LKDs to participate in an exploratory study of communication via telephone, e-mail, or text messaging postdonation; communication through this study was purely optional and did not replace standard follow-up. Of 69 LKDs recruited, 3% requested telephone call, 52% e-mail, and 45% text messaging. Telephone response rate was 0%; these LKDs were subsequently excluded from analysis. Overall response rates with e-mail or text messaging at 1 week, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years were 94%, 87%, 81%, 72%, and 72%. Lower response rates were seen in African Americans, even after adjusting for age, sex, and contact method (incidence rate ratio (IRR) nonresponse 2.07 5.8116.36 , P = .001). Text messaging had higher response rates than e-mail (IRR nonresponse 0.11 0.280.71 , P = .007). Rates of nonresponse were similar by sex (IRR 0.68, P = .4) and age (IRR 1.00, P > .9). In summary, LKDs strongly preferred electronic messaging over telephone and were highly responsive 2 years postdonation, even in this nonrequired, nonincentivized exploratory research study. These electronic communication tools can be automated and may improve regulatory compliance and postdonation care.

Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation: techniques and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we present our experience with ureteral complications requiring revision surgery after renal transplantation and compare our results to a matched control population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of our database between 1997 and 2012. We divided the cases into early (<60 d) and late repairs. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare graft survival between the intervention cohort and controls generated from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data set. RESULTS: Of 2671 kidney transplantations, 51 patients were identified as to having undergone 53 ureteral revision procedures; 43.4% of cases were performed within 60 d of the transplant and were all associated with urinary leaks, and 49% demonstrated ureteral stenosis. Reflux allograft pyelonephritis and ureterolithiasis were each the indication for intervention in 3.8%; 15.1% of the lesions were located at the anastomotic site, 37.7% in the distal segment, 7.5% in the middle segment, 5.7% proximal ureter, and 15.1% had a long segmental stenosis. In 18.9%, the location was not specified. Techniques used included ureterocystostomy (30.2%), ureteroureterostomy (34%), ureteropyelostomy (30.1%), pyeloileostomy (1.9%), and ureteroileostomy (3.8%). No difference in overall graft survival (HR 1.24 95% CI 0.33-4.64, p = 0.7) was detected when compared to the matched control group. CONCLUSION: Using a variety of techniques designed to re-establish effective urinary flow, we have been able to salvage a high percentage of these allografts. When performed by an experienced team, a ureteric complication does not significantly impact graft survival or function as compared to a matched control group.

Sources of Postacute Care Episode Payment Variation After Traumatic Hip Fracture Repair Among Medicare Beneficiaries: Cross-Sectional Retrospective Study.

The objective of this study was to evaluate how much variation in postacute care (PAC) spending after traumatic hip fracture exists between hospitals, and to what degree this variation is explained by patient factors, hospital factors, PAC setting, and PAC intensity. Background: Traumatic hip fracture is a common and costly event. This is particularly relevant given our aging population and that a substantial proportion of these patients are discharged to PAC settings. Methods: It is a cross-sectional retrospective study. In a retrospective review using Medicare claims data between 2014 and 2019, we identified PAC payments within 90 days of hospitalization discharges and grouped hospitals into quintiles of PAC spending. The degree of variation present in PAC spending across hospital quintiles was evaluated after accounting for patient case-mix factors and hospital characteristics using multivariable regression models, adjusting for PAC setting choice by fixing the proportion of PAC discharge disposition across hospital quintiles, and adjusting for PAC intensity by fixing the amount of PAC spending across hospital quintiles. The study pool included 125,745 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent operative management for traumatic hip fracture in 2078 hospitals. The primary outcome was PAC spending within 90 days of discharge following hospitalization for traumatic hip fracture. Results: Mean PAC spending varied widely between top versus bottom spending hospital quintiles ($31,831 vs $17,681). After price standardization, the difference between top versus bottom spending hospital quintiles was $8,964. Variation between hospitals decreased substantially after adjustment for PAC setting ($25,392 vs $21,274) or for PAC intensity ($25,082 vs $21,292) with little variation explained by patient or hospital factors. Conclusions: There was significant variation in PAC payments after a traumatic hip fracture between the highest- and lowest-spending hospital quintiles. Most of this variation was explained by choice of PAC discharge setting and intensity of PAC spending, not patient or hospital characteristics. These findings suggest potential systems-level inefficiencies that can be targeted for intervention to improve the appropriateness and value of healthcare spending.

Application of power analysis to determine the optimal reporting time frame for use in statewide trauma system quality reporting.

BACKGROUND: Meaningful reporting of quality metrics relies on detecting a statistical difference when a true difference in performance exists. Larger cohorts and longer time frames can produce higher rates of statistical differences. However, older data are less relevant when attempting to enact change in the clinical setting. The selection of time frames must reflect a balance between being too small (type II errors) and too long (stale data). We explored the use of power analysis to optimize time frame selection for trauma quality reporting. METHODS: Using data from 22 Level III trauma centers, we tested for differences in 4 outcomes within 4 cohorts of patients. With bootstrapping, we calculated the power for rejecting the null hypothesis that no difference exists amongst the centers for different time frames. From the entire sample for each site, we simulated randomly generated datasets. Each simulated dataset was tested for whether a difference was observed from the average. Power was calculated as the percentage of simulated datasets where a difference was observed. This process was repeated for each outcome. RESULTS: The power calculations for the 4 cohorts revealed that the optimal time frame for Level III trauma centers to assess whether a single site's outcomes are different from the overall average was 2 years based on an 80% cutoff. CONCLUSION: Power analysis with simulated datasets allows testing of different time frames to assess outcome differences. This type of analysis allows selection of an optimal time frame for benchmarking of Level III trauma center data.

Population-based Trends in Obesity and Kidney Transplantation Among Patients With End-stage Kidney Disease.

Obesity is a barrier to transplant, reducing access and leading to worse outcomes versus nonobese adults. Most transplant centers in the United States maintain body mass index (BMI) cutoffs to listing for kidney transplantation of 35 to 40 kg/m2. There is little contemporary data on the prevalence of obesity among patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) despite its impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare expenditures. METHODS: We utilized data from the US Renal Data System from 2008 to 2016 to identify a prevalent cohort of 1 079 410 patients with ESKD. Linear regression determined trends in the proportion of patients within each category of BMI. We also evaluated geographic variation in rates of obesity and transplantation across the United States. RESULTS: Among the 1 079 410 ESKD patients, the largest cohort of patients were those with obesity (n = 423 270; 39.2%). There were 309 707 (28.7%) patients with an overweight BMI and 274 683 (25.4%) with a normal BMI. The proportion of patients with obesity increased significantly from 36.8% in 2008 to 40.2% in 2016 (trend 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.51). There was significant geographic variation by state with rates of obesity ranging from 32.3% to 45.4% and state transplant rates among those obese patients ranging from 22.5% to 46.8%. There is a weak correlation between states with increased rates of obese ESKD patients and states with an increased obesity transplant rate as indicated with r = 0.40 (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Beneficiaries with obesity are now the largest and fastest growing demographic among patients with ESKD in the United States.

Venous thromboembolism: risk factors in the sleeve gastrectomy era.

BACKGROUND: Of complications after bariatric surgery, venous thromboembolism (VTE) has the greatest impact on mortality. OBJECTIVES: To examine risk factors for postoperative VTE and identify high-risk patients who may benefit from prolonged prophylaxis. SETTING: National Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database METHODS: Patients who underwent primary, laparoscopic bariatric surgery 2015-2019 were identified. Risk factors were sex, age, body mass index (BMI), history of VTE, immobility, venous stasis disease, operative time greater >3 hours, and procedure type. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine associations between factors and the outcome of postoperative VTE. We examined contributions of each factor through average marginal effects and E-values. We added Black versus White race to the same regression model to understand whether race acted as a moderating factor. RESULTS: In our study, 1677 of 605,782 (.28%) patients experienced postoperative VTE. On multivariable analysis, previous history of VTE had the greatest association, increasing risk of postoperative VTE by +.90% points (95% CI [confidence interval] +.73% to +1.07%). Lower-95% CI E-value bounds were 1.43 for men, 1.11 preoperative BMI, 7.38 history of VTE, and 2.15 operative length >3 hours. Black patients had an additional +.18% (95% CI +.14 to +.22%) risk of postoperative VTE, corresponding to a lower E-value bound of 2.50. CONCLUSION: In this study using recent years' national bariatric surgery data, we find history of VTE is the greatest driver of postoperative VTE. Most importantly, Black patients are more likely to suffer postoperative VTE. Now is the time to use the power of quality improvement programs to ensure health equity for all our patients.

Assessment of Potentially Preventable Hospital Readmissions After Major Surgery and Association With Public vs Private Health Insurance and Comorbidities.

Importance: Rehospitalization after major surgery is common and represents a significant cost to the health care system. Little is known regarding the causes of these readmissions and the degree to which they may be preventable. Objective: To evaluate the degree to which readmissions after major surgery are potentially preventable. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used a weighted sample of 1 937 354 patients from the 2017 National Readmissions Database to evaluate all adult inpatient hospitalizations for 1 of 7 common major surgical procedures. Statistical analysis was performed from January 14 to November 30, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study calculated 90-day readmission rates as well as rates of readmissions that were considered potentially preventable. Potentially preventable readmissions (PPRs) were defined as those with a primary diagnosis code for superficial surgical site infection, acute kidney injury, aspiration pneumonitis, or any of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-defined ambulatory care sensitive conditions. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with PPRs. Results: A total weighted sample of 1 937 354 patients (1 048 046 women [54.1%]; mean age, 66.1 years [95% CI, 66.0-66.3 years]) underwent surgical procedures; 164 755 (8.5%) experienced a readmission within 90 days. Potentially preventable readmissions accounted for 29 321 (17.8%) of all 90-day readmissions, for an estimated total cost to the US health care system of approximately $296 million. The most common reasons for PPRs were congestive heart failure exacerbation (34.6%), pneumonia (12.0%), and acute kidney injury (22.5%). In a multivariable model of adults aged 18 to 64 years, patients with public health insurance (Medicare or Medicaid) had more than twice the odds of PPR compared with those with private insurance (adjusted odds ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.94-2.25). Among patients aged 65 years or older, patients with private insured had 18% lower odds of PPR compared with patients with Medicare as the primary payer (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.74-0.90). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that nearly 1 in 5 readmissions after surgery are potentially preventable and account for nearly $300 million in costs. In addition to better inpatient care, improved access to ambulatory care may represent an opportunity to reduce costly readmissions among surgical patients.

Hospital effects drive variation in access to inpatient rehabilitation after trauma.

BACKGROUND: Postacute care rehabilitation is critically important to recover after trauma, but many patients do not have access. A better understanding of the drivers behind inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) use has the potential for major cost-savings as well as higher-quality and more equitable patient care. We sought to quantify the variation in hospital rates of trauma patient discharge to inpatient rehabilitation and understand which factors (patient vs. injury vs. hospital level) contribute the most. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 668,305 adult trauma patients admitted to 900 levels I to IV trauma centers between 2011 and 2015 using the National Trauma Data Bank. Participants were included if they met the following criteria: age >18 years, Injury Severity Score of ≥9, identifiable injury type, and who had one of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services preferred diagnoses for inpatient rehabilitation under the "60% rule." RESULTS: The overall risk- and reliability-adjusted hospital rates of discharge to IRF averaged 18.8% in the nonelderly adult cohort (18-64 years old) and 23.4% in the older adult cohort (65 years or older). Despite controlling for all patient-, injury-, and hospital-level factors, hospital discharge of patients to IRF varied substantially between hospital quintiles and ranged from 9% to 30% in the nonelderly adult cohort and from 7% to 46% in the older adult cohort. Proportions of total variance ranged from 2.4% (patient insurance) to 12.1% (injury-level factors) in the nonelderly adult cohort and from 0.3% (patient-level factors) to 26.0% (unmeasured hospital-level factors) in the older adult cohort. CONCLUSION: Among a cohort of injured patients with diagnoses that are associated with significant rehabilitation needs, the hospital at which a patient receives their care may drive a patient's likelihood of recovering at an IRF just as much, if not more, than their clinical attributes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, level IV.