ABSTRACT
Abstract Introduction Patients at public county hospitals often have poorer access to healthcare with advanced disease on presentation. These factors, along with limited resources at county hospitals, may have an impact on outcomes for patients requiring complex head and neck reconstruction. Objectives To delineate differences in the frequency of complications in two different care settings, a public county hospital and a private university hospital. Methods Retrospective review of otolaryngology patients at a university hospital compared with a publicly-funded county hospital. The main outcome measure was major complications including total flap loss or unplanned reoperation in 30 days. Secondary outcome measures included medical complications, partial flap loss, and unplanned hospital readmission in 30 days. Results In the county hospital sample (n = 58) free flap failure or reoperation occurred in 20.7% of the patients, and minor complications, in 36.2% of the patients. In the university hospital sample (n = 65) flap failure or reoperation occurred in 9.2% of the patients, and minor complications, in 12.3% of the patients. Patients at the private hospital who had surgery in the oropharynx were least likely to have minor complications. Conclusions Patients at the county hospital had a higher but not statistically significant difference in flap failure and reoperation than those at a university hospital, although the county hospital experienced more minor postoperative complications. This is likely multifactorial, and may be related to poorer access to primary care preoperatively, malnutrition, poorly controlled or undiagnosed medical comorbidities, and differences in hospital resources.
ABSTRACT
Introduction Patients at public county hospitals often have poorer access to healthcare with advanced disease on presentation. These factors, along with limited resources at county hospitals, may have an impact on outcomes for patients requiring complex head and neck reconstruction. Objective To delineate differences in the frequency of complications in two different care settings, a public county hospital and a private university hospital. Methods Retrospective review of otolaryngology patients at a university hospital compared with a publicly-funded county hospital. The main outcome measure was major complications including total flap loss or unplanned reoperation in 30 days. Secondary outcome measures included medical complications, partial flap loss, and unplanned hospital readmission in 30 days. Results In the county hospital sample ( n = 58) free flap failure or reoperation occurred in 20.7% of the patients, and minor complications, in 36.2% of the patients. In the university hospital sample ( n = 65) flap failure or reoperation occurred in 9.2% of the patients, and minor complications, in 12.3% of the patients. Patients at the private hospital who had surgery in the oropharynx were least likely to have minor complications. Conclusion Patients at the county hospital had a higher but not statistically significant difference in flap failure and reoperation than those at a university hospital, although the county hospital experienced more minor postoperative complications. This is likely multifactorial, and may be related to poorer access to primary care preoperatively, malnutrition, poorly controlled or undiagnosed medical comorbidities, and differences in hospital resources.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Travelers to countries with high tuberculosis incidence can acquire infection during travel. We sought to compare four screening interventions for travelers from low-incidence countries, who visit countries with varying tuberculosis incidence. METHODS: Decision analysis model: We considered hypothetical cohorts of 1,000 travelers, 21 years old, visiting Mexico, the Dominican Republic, or Haiti for three months. Travelers departed from and returned to the United States or Canada; they were born in the United States, Canada, or the destination countries. The time horizon was 20 years, with 3% annual discounting of future costs and outcomes. The analysis was conducted from the health care system perspective. Screening involved tuberculin skin testing (post-travel in three strategies, with baseline pre-travel tests in two), or chest radiography post-travel (one strategy). Returning travelers with tuberculin conversion (one strategy) or other evidence of latent tuberculosis (three strategies) were offered treatment. The main outcome was cost (in 2005 US dollars) per tuberculosis case prevented. RESULTS: For all travelers, a single post-trip tuberculin test was most cost-effective. The associated cost estimate per case prevented ranged from $21,406 for Haitian-born travelers to Haiti, to $161,196 for US-born travelers to Mexico. In all sensitivity analyses, the single post-trip tuberculin test remained most cost-effective. For US-born travelers to Haiti, this strategy was associated with cost savings for trips over 22 months. Screening was more cost-effective with increasing trip duration and infection risk, and less so with poorer treatment adherence. CONCLUSION: A single post-trip tuberculin skin test was the most cost-effective strategy considered, for travelers from the United States or Canada. The analysis did not evaluate the use of interferon-gamma release assays, which would be most relevant for travelers who received BCG vaccination after infancy, as in many European countries. Screening decisions should reflect duration of travel, tuberculosis incidence, and commitment to treat latent infection.