RESUMO
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.
RESUMO
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.