Post-discharge Outcomes and Healthcare Utilization Among Hispanic/Latinx Injury Survivors: English Language Proficiency Matters.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare post-discharge outcomes and healthcare utilization between English-speaking non-Hispanic White (NHW), English-speaking Hispanic/Latinx (ESHL), and Spanish-speaking Hispanic/Latinx (SSHL) survivors of traumatic injury. BACKGROUND: While there is evidence of racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare utilization and post-discharge outcomes after injury, the role of English language proficiency in these disparities remains unclear. METHODS: Moderate to severely injured adults from three level-1 trauma centers completed an interview in English or Spanish between 6-12 months post-injury to assess physical health-related quality of life (SF-12-PCS), return to work, and post-discharge healthcare utilization. The language used in the interview was used as a proxy for English-language proficiency, and participants were categorized as either NHW (reference), ESHL, or SSHL. Multivariable regression models estimated independent associations between language and race/ethnicity with SF-12-PCS, return to work, and post-discharge healthcare utilization outcomes. RESULTS: 3,304 injury survivors were followed: 2,977 (90%) NHW, 203 (6%) ESHL, and 124 (4%) SSHL. In adjusted analyses, no significant differences were observed between ESHL and NHW injury survivors for any outcomes at 6-12 months post-injury. However, SSHL injury survivors exhibited a lower mean SF-12-PCS (41.6 vs. 38.5), -3.07 (95% CI=-5.47, -0.66; P=0.012), decreased odds of returning to work (OR=0.47; CI=0.27 to 0.81; P=0.007), and were less likely to engage in non-injury related outpatient visits, such as primary care visits (OR=0.45; 95% CI 0.28, 0.73; P=0.001), compared to NHW patients. CONCLUSION: Hispanic/Latinx injury survivors have worse post-discharge outcomes and lower non-injury-related healthcare utilization than NHW if they have limited English-language proficiency. Addressing LEP-related barriers to care could help mitigate outcome and healthcare utilization disparities among Hispanic/Latinx injury survivors.

The Relationship Between Body Mass Index and Long-Term Outcomes Following Traumatic Injury.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the relationship between body mass index (BMI), a function of mass and height (masskg/height2m) and long-term outcomes among traumatic injury survivors. In this prospective cohort study, we investigate the relationship between BMI and long-term health outcomes in the trauma population. METHODS: Adult trauma survivors with an injury severity score ≥9 admitted to one of three level 1 trauma centers, from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2022, were surveyed via telephone between 6 and 12 mo postinjury. Participants were stratified into one of five groups by BMI at the time of trauma: L-BMI (BMI <18.5), N-BMI (BMI 18.5-24.9), H1-BMI (BMI 25-29.9), H2-BMI (BMI 30-34.9), and H3-BMI (BMI ≥35); N-BMI was used as the referent. Mental and physical health-related quality of life scores, pain, new functional limitations, and hospital readmissions were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare outcomes between study groups. RESULTS: 3830 patients were included. Of those, 124 were L-BMI (3.2%), 1495 N-BMI (39%), 1318 H1-BMI (34.4%), 541 H2-BMI (14.1%), and 352 H3-BMI (9.2%). L-BMI was associated with adverse physical (b = -3.13, CI = -5.71 to -0.55, P = 0.017) and mental health (b = -3.17, CI = -5.87 to -0.46, P = 0.022) outcomes 6-12 mo postinjury compared to the referent. H1-BMI and H2-BMI had higher odds of wo`rse physical outcomes (b = -1.47, CI = -2.42 to -0.52, P = 0.002; b = -3.11, CI = - 4.33 to -1.88, P ≤ 0.001, respectively) and chronic pain (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.24, CI = 1.04-1.47, P = 0.016; aOR = 1.52, CI = 1.21-1.90, P ≤ 0.001, respectively). Patients with H3-BMI had higher odds of worse physical outcomes compared to N-BMI (b = -4.82, CI = -6.28 to -3.37, P ≤ 0.001), chronic pain (aOR = 2.11, CI = 1.61-2.78, P ≤ 0.001), all-cause hospital readmissions (aOR = 1.62, CI = 1.10-2.34, P = 0.013), and new functional limitations (aOR = 1.39, CI = 1.08-1.79, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: BMI variance above or below N-BMI is associated with worse long-term outcomes following traumatic injury.

The invisible scars: Unseen financial complications worsen every aspect of long-term health in trauma survivors.

BACKGROUND: Trauma survivors are susceptible to experiencing financial toxicity (FT). Studies have shown the negative impact of FT on chronic illness outcomes. However, there is a notable lack of data on FT in the context of trauma. We aimed to better understand prevalence, risk factors, and impact of FT on trauma long-term outcomes. METHODS: Adult trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥9 treated at Level I trauma centers were interviewed 6 months to 14 months after discharge. Financial toxicity was considered positive if patients reported any of the following due to the injury: income loss, lack of care, newly applied/qualified for governmental assistance, new financial problems, or work loss. The Impact of FT on Patient Reported Outcome Measure Index System (PROMIS) health domains was investigated. RESULTS: Of 577 total patients, 44% (254/567) suffered some form of FT. In the adjusted model, older age (odds ratio [OR], 0.4; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.2-0.81) and stronger social support networks (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.74) were protective against FT. In contrast, having two or more comorbidities (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.01-3.28), lower education levels (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 95%, 1.26-3.03), and injury mechanisms, including road accidents (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.51-4.77) and intentional injuries (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 1.44-12.86) were associated with higher toxicity. No significant relationship was found with ISS, sex, or single-family household. Patients with FT had worse outcomes across all domains of health. There was a negative linear relationship between the severity of FT and worse mental and physical health scores. CONCLUSION: Financial toxicity is associated with long-term outcomes. Incorporating FT risk assessment into recovery care planning may help to identify patients most in need of mitigative interventions across the trauma care continuum to improve trauma recovery. Further investigations to better understand, define, and address FT in trauma care are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Understanding and Assisting the Recovery of Non-English-Speaking Trauma Survivors: Assessment of the NESTS Pathway.

INTRODUCTION: Spanish-speaking trauma and burn patients have unique needs in their post-discharge care navigation. The confluence of limited English proficiency, injury recovery, mental health, socioeconomic disadvantages, and acute stressors following hospital admission converge to enhance patients' vulnerability, but their specific needs and means of meeting these needs have not been well described. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional survey study describes the results of a multi-institutional initiative devised to help Spanish-speaking trauma and burn patients in their care navigation after hospitalization. The pathway consisted of informational resources, intake and follow up surveys, and multiple points of contact with a community health worker who aids in accessing community resources and navigating the healthcare system. RESULTS: From January 2022-November 2023, there were 114 patients identified as eligible for the NESTS pathway. Of these, 80 (70.2%) were reachable and consented to participate, and 68 of these patients were approached in person during their initial hospitalization. After initial screening, 60 (75.0%) of the eligible patients had a mental health, social services, or other need identified via our survey instrument. During the initial consultation with the CHW, 48 of the 60 patients with any identified need were connected to a resource (80%). Food support was the most prevalent need (N=46, 57.5%). More patients were connected to mental health resources (N=16) than reported need in this domain (N=7). CONCLUSIONS: The NESTS pathway identified the specific needs of Spanish-speaking trauma and burn patients in their recovery, notably food, transportation, and utilities. The pathway also addressed disparities in post-discharge care by connecting patients with community resources, with particular improvement in access to mental healthcare.

Beyond surviving: A scoping review of collaborative care models to inform the future of post-discharge trauma care.

ABSTRACT: Trauma centers demonstrate an impressive ability to save lives, as reflected by inpatient survival rates of over 95% in the United States. Nevertheless, we fail to allocate sufficient effort and resources to ensure that survivors and their families receive the necessary care and support after leaving the trauma center. The objective of this scoping review is to systematically map the research on collaborative care models (CCM) that have been put forward to improve trauma survivorship. Of 833 articles screened, we included 16 studies evaluating eight collaborative care programs, predominantly in the U.S. The majority of the programs offered care coordination and averaged 9-months in duration. Three-fourths of the programs incorporated a mental health provider within their primary team. Observed outcomes were diverse: some models showed increased engagement (e.g., Center for Trauma Survivorship, trauma quality-of-life follow-up clinic), while others presented mixed mental health outcomes and varied results on pain and healthcare utilization. The findings of this study indicate that collaborative interventions may be effective in mental health screening, PTSD and depression management, effective referrals, and improving patient satisfaction with care. A consensus on core elements and cost-effectiveness of CCMs is necessary to set the standard for comprehensive care in post-trauma recovery.