The acute care surgery model and elective surgery.

ABSTRACT: Two senior surgeons with active elective surgery practices call on their personal experiences to encourage acute care surgery programs to explore ways to incorporate elective surgery into their practice models. Although there are obstacles, these are not insurmountable problems, potential solutions exist, and this may help protect against burnout.

Injury-specific variables improve risk adjustment and hospital quality assessment in severe traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Hospital benchmarking is essential to quality improvement, but its usefulness depends on the ability of statistical models to adequately control for inter-hospital differences in patient mix. We explored whether the addition of injury-specific clinical variables to the current American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) algorithm would improve model fit. METHODS: We analyzed a prospective registry containing all adult patients who presented to a regional consortium of 14 trauma centers between 2010 and 2011 with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We used hierarchical logistic regression and stepwise forward selection to develop two novel risk-adjustment models. We then tested our novel models against the current TQIP model and ranked hospitals by their risk-adjusted mortality rates under each model to determine how model selection affects quality benchmarking. RESULTS: Seven hundred thirty-four patients met inclusion criteria. Stepwise selection resulted in two distinct models: one that added three TBI-specific variables (pupil reactivity, cerebral edema, loss of basal cisterns) to the model specification currently used by TQIP and another that combined two TBI-specific variables (pupil reactivity, cerebral edema) with a three-variable subset of TQIP (age, Abbreviated Injury Scale score for the head region, Glasgow Coma Scale motor score). Both novel models outperformed TQIP. Although rankings remained largely unchanged across model configurations, several hospitals moved across quality terciles. CONCLUSION: The inclusion of injury-specific variables improves risk adjustment for patients with severe TBI. Trauma Quality Improvement Program should consider replacing several of its general patient characteristics with injury-specific clinical predictors to increase efficiency, reduce the risk of overfitting, and improve the accuracy of hospital benchmarking. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiological, level II.

Expanding the scope of quality measurement in surgery to include nonoperative care: Results from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program emergency general surgery pilot.

BACKGROUND: Patients managed nonoperatively have been excluded from risk-adjusted benchmarking programs, including the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). Consequently, optimal performance evaluation is not possible for specialties like emergency general surgery (EGS) where nonoperative management is common. We developed a multi-institutional EGS clinical data registry within ACS NSQIP that includes patients managed nonoperatively to evaluate variability in nonoperative care across hospitals and identify gaps in performance assessment that occur when only operative cases are considered. METHODS: Using ACS NSQIP infrastructure and methodology, surgical consultations for acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis, and small bowel obstruction (SBO) were sampled at 13 hospitals that volunteered to participate in the EGS clinical data registry. Standard NSQIP variables and 16 EGS-specific variables were abstracted with 30-day follow-up. To determine the influence of complications in nonoperative patients, rates of adverse outcomes were identified, and hospitals were ranked by performance with and then without including nonoperative cases. RESULTS: Two thousand ninety-one patients with EGS diagnoses were included, 46.6% with appendicitis, 24.3% with cholecystitis, and 29.1% with SBO. The overall rate of nonoperative management was 27.4%, 6.6% for appendicitis, 16.5% for cholecystitis, and 69.9% for SBO. Despite comprising only 27.4% of patients in the EGS pilot, nonoperative management accounted for 67.7% of deaths, 34.3% of serious morbidities, and 41.8% of hospital readmissions. After adjusting for patient characteristics and hospital diagnosis mix, addition of nonoperative management to hospital performance assessment resulted in 12 of 13 hospitals changing performance rank, with four hospitals changing by three or more positions. CONCLUSION: This study identifies a gap in performance evaluation when nonoperative patients are excluded from surgical quality assessment and demonstrates the feasibility of incorporating nonoperative care into existing surgical quality initiatives. Broadening the scope of hospital performance assessment to include nonoperative management creates an opportunity to improve the care of all surgical patients, not just those who have an operation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, level IV; Epidemiologic, level III.

Characteristics of ACS-verified Level I and Level II trauma centers: A study linking trauma center verification review data and the National Trauma Data Bank of the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma.

BACKGROUND: The Trauma Quality Improvement Project of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) has demonstrated variations in trauma center outcomes despite similar verification status. The purpose of this study was to identify structural characteristics of trauma centers that affect patient outcomes. METHODS: Trauma registry data on 361,187 patients treated at 222 ACS-verified Level I and Level II trauma centers were obtained from the National Trauma Data Bank of ACS. These data were used to estimate each center's observed-to-expected (O-E) mortality ratio with 95% confidence intervals using multivariate logistic regression analysis. De-identified data on structural characteristics of these trauma centers were obtained from the ACS Verification Review Committee. Centers in the lowest quartile of mortality based on O-E ratio (n = 56) were compared to the rest (n = 166) using Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis to identify institutional characteristics independently associated with high-performing centers. RESULTS: Of the 72 structural characteristics explored, only 3 were independently associated with high-performing centers: annual patient visits to the emergency department of fewer than 61,000; proportion of patients on Medicare greater than 20%; and continuing medical education for emergency department physician liaison to the trauma program ranging from 55 and 113 hours annually. Each 5% increase in O-E mortality ratio was associated with an increase in total length of stay of one day (r = 0.25; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Very few structural characteristics of ACS-verified trauma centers are associated with risk-adjusted mortality. Thus, variations in patient outcomes across trauma centers are likely related to variations in clinical practices. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level III.

Revising Recommendations and Outcome Measurements after Complex Open Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.

Grading systems developed by the Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) for complex open abdominal wall reconstruction rely on limited outcomes: surgical site occurrence (SSO) and hernia recurrence. This does not account for the longitudinal restoration of a functional abdominal wall and the ability to correct complications. We performed a single-site, retrospective review of consecutive complex open abdominal wall reconstruction interventions with 24-month minimum follow-up to establish reoperation rates and compare long-term results to the VHWG. About 125 midline hernia repairs (>200 cm(2)) were studied. All had loss of functional domain and 47-month average follow-up. Demographics included: mean age 57 years, 47 per cent male, 63 per cent obese, and 34 per cent with contamination. Rates of SSO per VHWG grade were 9 per cent grade I, 45 per cent grade II, and 55 per cent grade III. Forty-three of 59 patients who developed complications were eventually successful after reoperation leading to an 87 per cent restoration rate. Select factors independently associated with reoperation included biological mesh and clinical history of infection. Although rates of SSO were higher than the VHWG published, we experienced high salvage rates except in patients who underwent biologic repair. We recommend restricted use of biologic mesh in contaminated and clean fields as well as modifications to the VHWG grading and recommendations.

Compliance With Evidence-Based Guidelines and Interhospital Variation in Mortality for Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

IMPORTANCE: Compliance with evidence-based guidelines in traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been proposed as a marker of hospital quality. However, the association between hospital-level compliance rates and risk-adjusted clinical outcomes for patients with TBI remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether hospital-level compliance with the Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines for intracranial pressure monitoring and craniotomy is associated with risk-adjusted mortality rates for patients with severe TBI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: All adult patients (N = 734) who presented to a regional consortium of 14 hospitals from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2010, with severe TBI (ie, blunt head trauma, Glasgow Coma Scale score of <9, and abnormal intracranial findings from computed tomography of the head). Data analysis took place from December 2013 through January 2015. We used hierarchical mixed-effects models to assess the association between hospital-level compliance with Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines and mortality rates after adjusting for patient-level demographics, severity of trauma (eg, mechanism of injury and Injury Severity Score), and TBI-specific variables (eg, cranial nerve reflexes and findings from computed tomography of the head). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hospital-level risk-adjusted inpatient mortality rate and hospital-level compliance with Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines for intracranial pressure monitoring and craniotomy. RESULTS: Unadjusted mortality rates varied by site from 20.0% to 50.0% (median, 42.6; interquartile range, 35.5-46.2); risk-adjusted rates varied from 24.3% to 56.7% (median, 41.1; interquartile range, 36.4-47.8). Overall, only 338 of 734 patients (46.1%) with an appropriate indication underwent placement of an intracranial pressure monitor and only 134 of 335 (45.6%) underwent craniotomy. Hospital-level compliance ranged from 9.6% to 65.2% for intracranial pressure monitoring and 6.7% to 76.2% for craniotomy. Despite widespread variation in compliance across hospitals, we found no association between hospital-level compliance rates and risk-adjusted patient outcomes (Spearman ρ = 0.030 [P = .92] for ICP monitoring and Spearman ρ = -0.066 [P = .83] for craniotomy). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hospital-level compliance with evidence-based guidelines has minimal association with risk-adjusted outcomes in patients with severe TBI. Our results suggest that caution should be taken before using compliance with these measures as independent quality metrics. Given the complexity of TBI care, outcomes-based metrics, including functional recovery, may be more accurate than current process measures at determining hospital quality.

Intracranial pressure monitoring and inpatient mortality in severe traumatic brain injury: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is recommended by the Brain Trauma Foundation, the benefits remain controversial. We sought to determine the impact of ICP monitor placement on inpatient mortality within a regional trauma system after correcting for selection bias through propensity score matching. METHODS: Data were collected on all severe TBI cases presenting to 14 trauma centers during the 2-year study period (2009-2010). Inclusion criteria were as follows: blunt injury, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 8 or lower in the emergency department, and abnormal intracranial findings on head computed tomography (CT). Two separate multivariate logistic regression models were used to predict ICP monitor placement and inpatient mortality after controlling for demographics, severity of injury, comorbidities, and TBI-specific variables (GCS score, pupil reactivity, international normalized ratio, and nine specific head CT findings). To account for selection bias, we developed a propensity score-matched model to estimate the "true" effect of ICP monitoring on in-hospital mortality. RESULT: A total of 844 patients met inclusion criteria; 22 died on arrival to the emergency department. Inpatient mortality was 38.8%; 46.0% of the patients underwent ICP monitor placement. Unadjusted mortality rates were significantly lower in the ICP monitoring group (30.7% vs. 45.7%, p < 0.001). ICP monitor placement was positively associated with CT findings of subdural hematoma, intraparenchymal contusion, and mass effect and negatively associated with age, alcoholism, and elevated international normalized ratio. After adjusting for selection bias via propensity score matching, ICP monitor placement was associated with an 8.3 percentage point reduction in the risk-adjusted mortality rate. CONCLUSION: ICP monitor placement occurred in only 46% of eligible patients but was associated with significantly decreased mortality after adjusting for baseline risk profile and the propensity to undergo monitoring. As the individual impact of ICP monitoring may vary, future efforts must determine who stands to benefit from invasive monitoring techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management study, level III.

Evaluation of hospital readmissions in surgical patients: do administrative data tell the real story?

IMPORTANCE: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has developed an all-cause readmission measure that uses administrative data to measure readmission rates and financially penalize hospitals with higher-than-expected readmission rates. OBJECTIVES: To examine the accuracy of administrative codes in determining the cause of readmission as determined by medical record review, to evaluate the readmission measure's ability to accurately identify a readmission as planned, and to document the frequency of readmissions for reasons clinically unrelated to the original hospital stay. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective review of all consecutive patients discharged from general surgery services at a tertiary care, university-affiliated teaching hospital during 8 consecutive quarters (quarter 4 [October through December] of 2009 through quarter 3 [July through September] of 2011). Clinical readmission diagnosis determined from direct medical record review was compared with the administrative diagnosis recorded in a claims database. The number of planned hospital readmissions defined by the readmission measure was compared with the number identified using clinical data. Readmissions unrelated to the original hospital stay were identified using clinical data. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Discordance rate between administrative and clinical diagnoses for all hospital readmissions, discrepancy between planned readmissions defined by the readmission measure and identified by clinical medical record review, and fraction of hospital readmissions unrelated to the original hospital stay. RESULTS: Of the 315 hospital readmissions, the readmission diagnosis listed in the administrative claims data differed from the clinical diagnosis in 97 readmissions (30.8%). The readmission measure identified 15 readmissions (4.8%) as planned, whereas clinical data identified 43 readmissions (13.7%) as planned. Unrelated readmissions comprised 70 of the 258 unplanned readmissions (27.1%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Administrative billing data, as used by the readmission measure, do not reliably describe the reason for readmission. The readmission measure accounts for less than half of the planned readmissions and does not account for the nearly one-third of readmissions unrelated to the original hospital stay. Implementation of this readmission measure may result in unwarranted financial penalties for hospitals.

The American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program.

The American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS TQIP) is a recent addition to the many quality improvement collaboratives that have been established in surgery. On the background of a well-established trauma center and its performance improvement activities, ACS TQIP offers the potential to advance trauma care and offers participating centers the opportunity to better understand their strengths and areas for improvement. The rationale for ACS TQIP's development, implementation challenges, and potential for advancing the quality of trauma care are described.

Surgical procedures for patients receiving mechanical cardiac support.

Mechanical cardiac support devices are used for patients with cardiopulmonary failure. We reviewed our institutional experience with noncardiac surgical procedures (NCPs) in patients supported by ventricular assist devices (VADs, n = 198) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO, n = 165) between July 1998 and June 2010. In total, 64 NCPs were performed in 55 VAD patients and 14 NCPs in 14 ECMO patients. Thirty-day mortality was higher for the VAD compared with the ECMO group (25 vs 86%; P < 0.001) and was greater for emergent compared with nonemergent procedures (58 vs 19%; P < 0.001). Excluding tracheostomy, no patients died within 30 days of a nonemergent procedure. Kaplan-Meier survival showed a trend toward worse survival after NCP in ECMO patients, but NCP did not alter survival in VAD patients. Fewer VAD patients were bridged to heart transplantation when NCP was required, and time from device implantation to transplant was significantly longer than for patients without NCP. In summary, this is the largest series of NCPs on VAD support and the only series on ECMO. Mortality is substantial for ECMO patients. Selected procedures can be performed safely in VAD patients but will delay heart transplantation.

Pelvic fracture: the last 50 years.

The past 50 years have been a time of rapid progress in the control of mortality and morbidity of pelvic fracture. Early understanding of the anatomic features of the fracture and the potential for major, life-threatening arterial hemorrhage in a small proportion of patients led to multidisciplinary approaches designed to control hemorrhage and temporarily stabilize the fracture. Progress in the diagnosis and management of lower urinary tract injuries has resulted in maintenance of urinary continence and sexual function in a large proportion of patients with pelvic fracture-associated urinary tract injury. Finally, definitive open reduction and fixation of the fracture has led to permanent pelvic stability and pain-free walking in most patients. With successful combination of these approaches, survival and return to a satisfactory level of function is now the rule rather than the exception for patients with severe pelvic fracture.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services quality indicators do not correlate with risk-adjusted mortality at trauma centers.

OBJECTIVES: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) publicly reports hospital compliance with evidence-based processes of care as quality indicators. We hypothesized that compliance with CMS quality indicators would correlate with risk-adjusted mortality rates in trauma patients. METHODS: A previously validated risk-adjustment algorithm was used to measure observed-to-expected mortality ratios (O/E with 95% confidence interval) for Level I and II trauma centers using the National Trauma Data Bank data. Adult patients (>or=16 years) with at least one severe injury (Abbreviated Injury Score >or=3) were included (127,819 patients). Compliance with CMS quality indicators in four domains was obtained from Hospital Compare website: acute myocardial infarction (8 processes), congestive heart failure (4 processes), pneumonia (7 processes), surgical infections (3 processes). For each domain, a single composite score was calculated for each hospital. The relationship between O/E ratios and CMS quality indicators was explored using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: There was no relationship between compliance with CMS quality indicators and risk-adjusted outcomes of trauma patients. CONCLUSIONS: CMS quality indicators do not correlate with risk-adjusted mortality rates in trauma patients. Hence, there is a need to develop new trauma-specific process of care quality indicators to evaluate and improve quality of care in trauma centers.

Improved trauma system multicasualty incident response: comparison of two train crash disasters.

BACKGROUND: Two train crash multicasualty incidents (MCI) occurred in 2005 and 2008 in Los Angeles. A postcrash analysis of the first MCI determined that most victims went to local community hospitals (CHs) with underutilization of trauma centers (TCs), resulting in changes to our disaster plan. To determine whether our trauma system MCI response improved, we analyzed the distribution of patients from the scene to TCs and CHs in the two MCIs. METHODS: Data from the emergency medical services and TC records were interrogated to compare patients triage status, type of transport, and the destination in the 2008 MCI to the 2005 MCI. Clinical data from the 2008 MCI were tabulated to evaluate severity of injuries, need for immediate and delayed operation, need for intensive care unit, and need for specialty surgical services, and appropriate distribution of patients. RESULTS: In 2005, 14 (56%) of the 25 severely injured patients and 75 (71%) of the 106 total patients were transported to four CHs. In 2008, 53 (93%) of 57 of the severely injured patients were transported to TCs and only 34 (35%) of 98 of total patients were transported to nine CHs. In 2008, more TCs were used (8 vs. 5) and more patients were transported by air (34 vs. 2). In 2008, the most severely injured victims were transported to four level I TCs (median injury severity score, 16; range, 1-43; 10 emergent operations) and four level II TCs (median injury severity score, 10; range, 1-22; 4 emergent operations). Only 11 patients were admitted to CHs, and no operations were required. CONCLUSIONS: A trauma system performance improvement program allowed us to significantly improve our response to MCIs with improved utilization of TCs and improved distribution of victims according to injury severity and needs.

The Trauma Quality Improvement Program: pilot study and initial demonstration of feasibility.

OBJECTIVE: The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma has created a "Trauma Quality Improvement Program" (TQIP) that uses the existing infrastructure of Committee on Trauma programs. As the first step toward full implementation of TQIP, a pilot study was conducted in 23 American College of Surgeons verified or state designated Level I and II trauma centers. This study details the feasibility and acceptance of TQIP among the participating centers. METHODS: Data from the National Trauma Data Bank for patients admitted to pilot study hospitals during 2007 were used (15,801 patients). A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to estimate risk-adjusted mortality in aggregate and on three prespecified subgroups (1: blunt multisystem, 2: penetrating truncal, and 3: blunt single-system injury). Benchmark reports were developed with each center's risk adjusted mortality (expressed as an observed-to-expected [O/E] mortality ratio and 90% confidence interval [CI]) and crude complication rates available for comparison. Reports were deidentified with only the recipient having access to their performance relative to their peers. Feedback from individual centers regarding the utility of the reports was collected by survey. RESULTS: Overall crude mortality was 7.7% and in cohorts 1 to 3 was 16.4%, 12.4%, and 5.1%, respectively. In the aggregate risk-adjusted analysis, three trauma centers were low outliers (O/E and 90% CI <1) and two centers were high outliers (O/E and 90% CI >1) with the remaining 18 centers demonstrating average mortality. Challenges identified were in benchmarking mortality after penetrating injury due to small sample size and in the limited capture of complications. Ninety-two percent of survey respondents found the report clear and understandable, and 90% thought that the report was useful. Sixty-three percent of respondents will be taking action based on the report. CONCLUSIONS: Using the National Trauma Data Bank infrastructure to provide risk-adjusted benchmarking of trauma center mortality is feasible and perceived as useful. There are differences in O/E ratios across similarly verified or designated centers. Substantial work is required to allow for morbidity benchmarking.

Acute care surgery after renal transplantation.

Emergent operation after renal transplantation (RT) has traditionally been associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. We reviewed 2340 adult patients who underwent RT at our tertiary care center and identified 55 patients who required acute care surgical consultation within 1 year of transplantation. Of these, 43 were treated operatively and 12 nonoperatively. Primary diagnoses were intestinal problems in 29 patients (53%), including diverticulitis, ischemia, perforation, obstruction, and bleeding; cholecystitis in 10 (18%); fluid collections in six (11%), appendicitis and hernias in two each (4%); gastritis in one (2%); and no diagnosis in five (9%). Colonic pathology was treated with resection and diversion in 14 of 16 patients who underwent surgery. Acute allograft rejection preceded the surgical problem in five patients. Complications occurred in 13 per cent of patients, and mortality was 9 per cent. Colonic ischemia had a fulminating presentation and particular morbidity. We conclude that acute gastrointestinal emergencies after RT are rare and that early and aggressive intervention using an acute care surgical model yields excellent results.

Positive serum ethanol level and mortality in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury.

HYPOTHESIS: Ethanol exposure is associated with decreased mortality in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. DESIGN: Retrospective database review. SETTING: Trauma centers contributing to the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB). PATIENTS: Version 6.2 of the NTDB (2000-2005) was queried for all patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (head Abbreviated Injury Score > or =3) and ethanol levels measured on admission. Demographics and outcomes were compared between patients with traumatic brain injuries with and without ethanol in their blood. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the relationship between mortality and ethanol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality and complications. RESULTS: A total of 38 019 patients with severe traumatic brain injuries were evaluated. Thirty-eight percent tested positive for ethanol. Ethanol-positive patients were younger (mean [SD], 37.7 [15.1] vs 44.1 [22.0] years, P < .001), had a lower Injury Severity Score (22.3 [10.0] vs 23.0 [10.3], P < .001), and a lower Glasgow Coma Scale score (10.0 [5.1] vs 11.0 [4.9], P < .001) compared with their ethanol-negative counterparts. After logistic regression analysis, ethanol was associated with reduced mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.96; P = .005) and higher complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.33; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Serum ethanol is independently associated with decreased mortality in patients with moderate to severe head injuries. Additional research is warranted to investigate the potential therapeutic implications of this association.

Trauma system: the backbone of disaster preparedness.

BACKGROUND: To describe the Los Angeles County trauma system response to disasters. METHODS: Review of trauma system structure and multicasualty events. RESULTS: The Los Angeles County trauma system is made up of 13 level I and II trauma centers with defined catchment areas that serve 10 million people in 88 cites over 4,000 square miles and receive more than 20,000 trauma activations annually. There is an organized disaster plan, which is orchestrated through the Medical Alert Center that coordinates the distribution of casualties from the scene of a multicasualty event, with the most critically injured patients going to level I centers by air, severe injuries to level I and II centers by ground and air and less severe injuries to local community hospitals by ground. The plan has been used in several multicasualty events over the last 25 years, the most recent of which occurred 6 hours after this paper was presented. CONCLUSION: The system allows for all critically injured patients to be distributed to several trauma centers, so that all can be cared for in a timely fashion without overwhelming any one trauma center and without critically injured patients being taken to nontrauma centers where they cannot receive optimal care. The answer to disaster preparedness in our country is to develop this kind of trauma system in every state. Doing so will improve access of our population to excellent care on a daily basis and will provide a network of trauma centers that can be mobilized to most effectively care for victims of multicasualty events.