Beyond Recidivism: Hospital-Based Violence Intervention and Early Health and Social Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs) are aimed at decreasing recurrent injury and improving the social determinants of health. We hypothesized that the HVIP intervention should be evaluated by how well it can address the immediate health and social needs of patients after injury. Our study sought to describe the experience of our nascent HVIP. STUDY DESIGN: Case management records of patients treated by the HVIP of a level 1 trauma center from July 1, 2017 to October 1, 2020 were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were as follows: age between 18 and 60 with injury mechanisms that resulted from intentional violence. Patient-stated goals and social worker designation of patient services provided were analyzed. A subset of HVIP patients who completed the three planned study visit surveys at discharge and 1 and 3 months were compared with a cohort of violently injured patients to whom HVIP services were not available. Participants in both groups were asked to complete a battery of validated surveys to assess social outcomes and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Repeated-measures ANOVA was used to compare the two groups. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-five patients met the inclusion criteria. One hundred and forty-six patients (49%) achieved their stated goals within 6 months of hospital discharge. Sixteen patients who achieved their stated goals disengaged from the program. Engagement in the HVIP resulted in significantly less PTSD at the time of hospital discharge. HVIP patients also experienced higher positive affect at hospital discharge, as described in the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. HVIP participants were significantly more likely to achieve early positive health outcomes, such as completion of victim of crime compensation and return to school. CONCLUSIONS: Our HVIP successfully achieved patient-stated short-term health and social goals in nearly half of all enrollees, indicating that HVIP patients are more likely to improve their social determinants of health than non-HVIP patients. Short-term health and social outcomes were improved in HVIP patients compared with non-HVIP patients, indicating increased engagement with the healthcare system. We suggest that these outcomes should replace recidivism as a metric for the efficacy of HVIP programs.

Outcomes after emergency general surgery and trauma care in incarcerated individuals: An EAST multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The US incarcerates more individuals than any other country. Prisoners are the only population guaranteed health care by the US constitution, but little is known about their surgical needs. This multicenter study aimed to describe the acute care surgery (ACS) needs of incarcerated individuals. METHODS: Twelve centers prospectively identified incarcerated patients evaluated in their emergency department by the ACS service. Centers collected diagnosis, treatment, and complications from chart review. Patients were classified as either emergency general surgery (EGS) patients or trauma patients and their characteristics and outcomes were investigated. Poisson regression accounting for clustering by center was used to calculate the relative risk (RR) of readmission, representation within 90 days, and failure to follow-up as an outpatient within 90 days for each cohort. RESULTS: More than 12 months, ACS services evaluated 943 patients, 726 (80.3%) from jail, 156 (17.3%) from prison, and 22 (2.4%) from other facilities. Most were men (89.7%) with a median age of 35 years (interquartile range, 27-47). Trauma patients comprised 54.4% (n = 513) of the cohort. Admission rates were similar for trauma (61.5%) and EGS patients (60.2%). Head injuries and facial fractures were the most common injuries, while infections were the most common EGS diagnosis. Self-harm resulted in 102 trauma evaluations (19.9%). Self-inflicted injuries were associated with increased risk of readmission (RR, 4.3; 95% confidence interval, 3.02-6.13) and reevaluation within 90 days (RR, 4.96; 95% confidence interval, 3.07-8.01). CONCLUSION: Incarcerated patients who present with a range of trauma and EGS conditions frequently require admission, and follow-up after hospitalization was low at the treating center. Poor follow-up coupled with high rates of assault, self-harm, mental health, and substance use disorders highlight the vulnerability of this population. Hospital and correctional facility interventions are needed to decrease self-inflicted injuries and assaults while incarcerated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiological, Level III.

High Acuity of Postoperative Consults to Emergency General Surgery at an Urban Safety Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) has high rates of morbidity, mortality, and readmission. Therefore, it might be expected that an EGS service fields many consultations for postoperative patients. However, with the known overutilization of emergency department visits for nonurgent conditions, we hypothesized most postoperative consults received by an EGS service would be nonurgent and could be appropriately managed as an outpatient. METHODS: We reviewed all EGS consults at a single urban safety net hospital over a 12-month period, screening for patients who had undergone surgery in the previous 12 mo. This included consultations from the emergency room and inpatient setting. Demographics, admission status, procedures performed, and other details were abstracted from the chart and Vizient reports. Consultation questions were categorized and then reviewed by an expert panel to determine if conditions could have been managed as an outpatient. RESULTS: The EGS service received a total of 1112 consults, with 99 (9%) for a postoperative condition. Overall, 85% of postoperative consults were admitted after consultation, 19% underwent surgery and 21% underwent a procedure with gastroenterology or interventional radiology. Expert review classified slightly over one-third (36%) of consults as nonurgent. CONCLUSIONS: Most postoperative consults seen at our urban safety net hospital represent true morbidity that required admission, intervention, or surgery. Despite this high acuity, one-third of postoperative consults could have been managed as an outpatient. Efforts to improve discharge instructions and set patient expectations could limit unnecessary postoperative emergency department visits.

Unpacking the Causes of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Violently Injured Patients.

BACKGROUND: Violence is a public health problem that disproportionately affects urban communities. The root causes of PTSD and effects on quality of life, substance abuse, and mental health are unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of PTSD and its root causes to direct services to be provided in a hospital-based violence intervention program. METHODS: Victims of Violence (VOVs) at University Hospital were approached from December 2017 to June 2019. They completed several validated patient-reported outcome surveys, including the Traumatic Life Events Questionnaire, the Peritraumatic Dissociative Experiences Questionnaire, Peritraumatic Dissociative Inventory, Positive and Negative Affect Scale, and the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Drug Abuse Screening Test. Responses were recorded in Research Electronic Data Capture and were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: Fifty-four individuals completed the surveys; 94% were men, 88% black, and 100% victims of interpersonal violence. 85% screened positive for PTSD. VOVs experienced many traumatic events throughout their life. Reported alcohol and drug abuse were low, with 91% at low risk for alcohol use disorders and 92% at low risk for drug abuse disorders (Figure 1). Positive affect remained high, indicating the possibility of resiliency in this population. CONCLUSIONS: PTSD is high in VOVs in urban trauma centers. Understanding the root causes of PTSD can help direct interventions to support individuals with services that meet their individual needs. Simple screening tools can help hospital-based violence intervention programs and trauma social workers identify individual needs and assess risk for mental health and substance abuse disorders.

Identifying participants for inclusion in hospital-based violence intervention: An analysis of 18 years of urban firearm recidivism.

BACKGROUND: Identifying individuals at highest risk maximizes efficacy of prevention programs in decreasing recidivist gunshot wound (GSW) injury. Characteristics of GSW recidivists may identify this population. Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs) are one effective strategy; however, programs are expensive, therefore, when possible, epidemiologic data should guide inclusion criteria. METHODS: Seventeen years of all GSW patients presenting to an urban Level I trauma center were reviewed. Countywide murders were reviewed from the same timeframe. Recidivists were any patient presenting twice, either to the hospital or once to the hospital and subsequently dying by firearm. Demographics and characteristics of future recidivists were compared with nonfuture recidivists. RESULTS: There were 9,699 unique intentional, GSW cases reviewed and 1,426 died, leaving 8,273 at risk of recidivism. Five hundred fourteen (6.2%) became recidivists. Most recidivists were African-American men and were younger at first GSW. Median time between incidents was 2.5 years, with a range of 0 days to 16 years. Nearly half were treated and released from the emergency department at their first episode of GSW. For recidivists who died, 128 died at the second incident, 29 at later incidents. Mortality from a second incident of firearm injury is 10% higher than first injuries, second hospitalizations are US $5,000 more expensive, and loss of life has a societal cost of US $167 billion in this community alone. CONCLUSION: The most appropriate population for inclusion in HVIPs at our hospital are young black men. The HVIP services are needed in the emergency department to address those treated and released at first GSW. Recidivists have higher mortality, and hospitalizations are significantly more expensive at the second injury. The investment in prevention is justified and may lead to a decrease in recidivism. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management level III.