ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The transfer of pediatric patients with testicular torsion from community hospitals to pediatric centers can be a time and resource-intensive step toward emergent surgical intervention. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe trends of patient transfer in our state and compare clinical outcomes and health system costs between patients transferred and treated primarily at a pediatric center. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study compared patients aged 1-18 years who presented directly to a pediatric center to those transferred for acute testicular torsion from 2018 to 2023. Exclusion criteria included age <1 year, non-urgent surgery, and admission from clinic. Patient age, BMI, Tanner stage, ASA class, insurance coverage, and presentation time were covariates. Group characteristics and times from symptom onset to initial ED presentation to surgery were compared via two-sided Student's t-tests. Clinical outcomes (orchiectomy, testicular atrophy) were compared via Fisher's exact tests. Costs from transferring hospitals were estimated from costs at our institution, and medical transport costs were extrapolated from contract prices between transport agencies and the pediatric center to compare total episode-of-care cost. RESULTS: A total of 133 cases (37 primaries, 96 transfers) met inclusion criteria. Transfers increased over the study period (67%-75%). There were no significant differences in age, Tanner stage, ASA score, BMI, or time of day of presentation between groups. Median transfer distance was 12 miles (IQR 7-22) and time was 1 h (IQR 1-2). More than half of cases (53%) were transferred due to hospital policy regarding surgical treatment of minors, and 25% due to lack of urology coverage. Time from initial ED site to OR was nearly doubled for the transfer group (median 4.5 vs 2.5 h, p = 0.02). Despite a higher rate of orchiectomy in the primary group (43 vs 22%, p = 0.01), this difference was not significant after stratification by symptom duration. The estimated average cost of care for patients transferred was twice that of primary patients ($15,082 vs $6898). DISCUSSION: Transfer of pediatric patients in our state for testicular torsion has increased in recent years. Hospital policies and local urology coverage are primary drivers of patient transfer which nearly doubled time to surgical intervention and more than doubled cost of care. Clinical outcomes were driven by delayed presentation. CONCLUSION: Transfer of pediatric patients for testicular torsion nearly doubles time to surgical intervention and more than doubles cost of care. Restrictive hospital policies and gaps in rural hospital urology coverage present opportunities to improve the quality and efficiency of care for these children.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Urodynamic testing (UDS) is an important tool in the management of pediatric lower urinary tract conditions. There have been notable efforts to standardize pediatric UDS nomenclature and technique, but no formal guidelines exist on essential elements to include in a clinical report. We sought to identify ideal structure and elements of a pediatric UDS assessment based on expert consensus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pediatric urologists regularly performing UDS were queried using a Delphi process. Participants were invited representing varied geographic, experience, and societal involvement. Participants underwent 3 rounds of questionnaires between November 2022 and August 2023 focusing on report organization, elements, definitions, and automated electronic health record clinical decision support. Professional billing requirements were also considered. Consensus was defined as 80% agreeing either in favor of or against a topic. Elements without consensus were discussed in subsequent rounds. RESULTS: A diverse sample of 30 providers, representing 27 institutions across 21 US states; Washington, District of Columbia; and Canada completed the study. Participants reported interpreting an average number of 5 UDS reports per week (range 1-22). The finalized consensus report identifies 93 elements that should be included in a pediatric UDS report based on applicable study conditions and findings. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus report details the key elements and structure agreed upon by an expert panel of pediatric urologists. Further standardization of documentation should aid collaboration and research for patients undergoing UDS. Based on this information, development of a standardized UDS report template using electronic health record implementation principles is underway, which will be openly available for pediatric urologists.