RESUMEN
Importance: Evaluating how social determinants of health (SDOH) influence veteran outcomes is crucial, particularly for quality improvement. Objective: To measure associations between SDOH, care fragmentation, and surgical outcomes using a Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR). Design, Setting, And Participants: This was a cohort study of US veterans using data from the Veterans Affairs (VA) Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP; 2013-2019) limited to patients aged 65 years or older with inpatient stays between 2 and 30 days, merged with multiple data sources, including Medicare. Race and ethnicity data were retrieved from VASQIP, Medicare and Medicaid beneficiary summary files, the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse, and the United States Veterans Eligibility Trends and Statistics file. Data were analyzed between September 2023 and February 2024. Exposure: Living in a highly deprived neighborhood (Area Deprivation Index >85), race and ethnicity used as a social construct, rurality, and care fragmentation (percentage of non-VA care days). Main Outcomes and Measures: DOOR is a composite, patient-centered ranking of 26 outcomes ranging from no complication (1, best) to 90-day mortality or near-death complications (6, worst). A series of proportional odds regressions was used to assess the impact of SDOH and care fragmentation adjusted for clinical risk factors, including presentation acuity (presenting with preoperative acute serious conditions and urgent or emergent surgical procedures). Results: The cohort had 93â¯644 patients (mean [SD] age, 72.3 [6.2] years; 91â¯443 [97.6%] male; 74â¯624 [79.7%] White). Veterans who identified as Black (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10; P = .048) vs White and veterans with higher care fragmentation (per 20% increase in VA care days relative to all care days: aOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02; P < .001) were associated with worse (higher) DOOR scores until adjusting for presentation acuity. Living in rural geographic areas was associated with better DOOR scores than living in urban areas (aOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.96; P < .001), and rurality was associated with lower presentation acuity (preoperative acute serious conditions: aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.95; P = .001). Presentation acuity was higher in veterans identifying as Black, living in deprived neighborhoods, and with increased care fragmentation. Conclusions and Relevance: Veterans identifying as Black and veterans with greater proportions of non-VA care had worse surgical outcomes. VA programs should direct resources to reduce presentation acuity among Black veterans, incentivize veterans to receive care within the VA where possible, and better coordinate veterans' treatment and records between care sources.
RESUMEN
Background: The Surgical Infection Society (SIS) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) in 1992, 2002, 2010, and 2017. Here, we present the most recent guideline update based on a systematic review of current literature. Methods: The writing group, including current and former members of the SIS Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee and other individuals with content or guideline expertise within the SIS, working with a professional librarian, performed a systematic review using PubMed/Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science from 2016 until February 2024. Keyword descriptors combined "surgical site infections" or "intra-abdominal infections" in adults limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Additional relevant publications not in the initial search but identified during literature review were included. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system was utilized to evaluate the evidence. The strength of each recommendation was rated strong (1) or weak (2). The quality of the evidence was rated high (A), moderate (B), or weak (C). The guideline contains new recommendations and updates to recommendations from previous IAI guideline versions. Final recommendations were developed by an iterative process. All writing group members voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: This updated evidence-based guideline contains recommendations from the SIS for the treatment of adult patients with IAI. Evidence-based recommendations were developed for antimicrobial agent selection, timing, route of administration, duration, and de-escalation; timing of source control; treatment of specific pathogens; treatment of specific intra-abdominal disease processes; and implementation of hospital-based antimicrobial agent stewardship programs. Summary: This document contains the most up-to-date recommendations from the SIS on the prevention and management of IAI in adult patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Management of geriatric trauma patients requires balancing chronic comorbidities with acute injuries. We developed a care model in which patients are managed by hospitalists with trauma-centered education and hypothesized that clinical outcomes would be similar to outcomes in patients primarily managed by trauma surgeons. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of trauma patients aged ≥65 from January 2020 to December 2021. Groups were defined by admitting service: trauma surgery service (TSS) or geriatric trauma hospitalist service (GTHS). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Regression analyses and inverse probability treatment weighted (IPTW) propensity score (PS) analyses were performed to determine the association between admitting service and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1004 patients were eligible for inclusion-580 GTHS and 424 TSS admissions. GTHS patients were older (82 vs. 74, p < 0.001), more likely to have suffered blunt trauma (99.5% vs. 95%, p < 0.001), more likely to have comorbidities (91.2% vs. 87%, p < 0.001), had higher Charlson Comorbidity Indexes (CCIs), and had lower median injury severity scores (9 vs. 13, p < 0.001). Rates of mortality, delirium, 30-day readmission, and overall complications were low and similar between groups. While TSS patients were likely to be discharged home, GTHS had more discharges to skilled nursing facilities and longer length of stay (LOS). On multivariable analysis adjusted for age, ISS, CCI, and sex, patients admitted to GTHS had lower odds of death with an odds ratio of 0.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02-0.75, p = 0.03) when compared to TSS. On IPTW PS analysis, patients admitted to GTHS had similar odds of death with an odds ratio of 0.3 (95% CI 0.06-1.6, p = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Protocolized admission criteria to a GTHS resulted in similar low mortality rates but longer LOS when compared to patients admitted to a TSS. This care model may inform other trauma centers in developing their strategies for managing the increasing volume of vulnerable injured older adults.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Since introducing new and alternative treatment options may increase decisional conflict, we aimed to describe the use of the decision support tool (DST) and its impact on treatment preference and decisional conflict. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics are an effective alternative to appendectomy, with both approaches associated with a different set of risks (e.g., recurrence vs surgical complications) and benefits (e.g., more rapid return to work vs decreased chance of readmission). Patients often have limited knowledge of these treatment options and decision support tools that include video-based educational materials and questions to elicit patient preferences about outcomes may be helpful. Concurrent to the Comparing Outcomes of Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial, our group developed a DST for appendicitis treatment (www.appyornot.org). METHODS: A retrospective cohort including people who self-reported current appendicitis and used the AppyOrNot DST between 2021-2023. Treatment preferences before- and after- use of the DST, demographic information, and Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) were reported after completing the DST. RESULTS: 8,243 people from 66 countries and all 50 US states accessed the DST. Before the DST, 14% had a strong preference for antibiotics and 31% for appendectomy, with 55% undecided. After using the DST, the proportion in the undecided category decreased to 49% (P<0.0001). 52% of those who completed the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Score (DCS) (n=356) reported the lowest level of decisional conflict (<25) after using the DST; 43% had a DCS score of 25-50, 5.1% had a DCS score of >50 and 2.5% had and DCS score of >75. CONCLUSION: The publicly available DST appyornot.org reduced the proportion that was undecided about which treatment they favored and had a modest influence on those with strong treatment preferences. Decisional conflict was not common after use. The use of this DST is now a component of a nationwide implementation program aimed at improving the way surgeons share information about appendicitis treatment options. If its use can be successfully implemented, this may be a model for improving communication about treatment for patients experiencing emergency health conditions.
RESUMEN
Importance: Gallstone pancreatitis (GSP) is the leading cause of acute pancreatitis, accounting for approximately 50% of cases. Without appropriate and timely treatment, patients are at increased risk of disease progression and recurrence. While there is increasing consensus among guidelines for the management of mild GSP, adherence to these guidelines remains poor. In addition, there is minimal evidence to guide clinicians in the treatment of moderately severe and severe pancreatitis. Observations: The management of GSP continues to evolve and is dependent on severity of acute pancreatitis and concomitant biliary diagnoses. Across the spectrum of severity, there is evidence that goal-directed, moderate fluid resuscitation decreases the risk of fluid overload and mortality compared with aggressive resuscitation. Patients with isolated, mild GSP should undergo same-admission cholecystectomy; early cholecystectomy within 48 hours of admission has been supported by several randomized clinical trials. Cholecystectomy should be delayed for patients with severe disease; for severe and moderately severe disease, the optimal timing remains unclear. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is only useful for patients with suspected cholangitis or biliary obstruction, although the concomitance of these conditions in patients with GSP is rare. Modality of evaluation of the common bile duct to rule out concomitant choledocholithiasis varies and should be tailored to level of concern based on objective measures, such as laboratory results and imaging findings. Among these modalities, intraoperative cholangiography is associated with reduced length of stay and decreased use of ERCP. However, the benefit of routine intraoperative cholangiography remains in question. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment of GSP is dependent on disease severity, which can be difficult to assess. A comprehensive review of clinically relevant evidence and recommendations on GSP severity grading, fluid resuscitation, timing of cholecystectomy, need for ERCP, and evaluation and management of persistent choledocholithiasis can help guide clinicians in diagnosis and management.
Asunto(s)
Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Colecistectomía , Cálculos Biliares , Pancreatitis , Humanos , Cálculos Biliares/complicaciones , Cálculos Biliares/terapia , Pancreatitis/terapia , Pancreatitis/complicaciones , Fluidoterapia , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Non-narcotic intravenous medications may be a beneficial adjunct to oral multimodal pain regimens (MMPRs) which reduce but do not eliminate opioid exposure and prescribing after trauma. We hypothesized that the addition of a sub-dissociative ketamine infusion (KI) to a standardized oral MMPR reduces inpatient opioid exposure. METHODS: Eligible adult trauma patients admitted to the intermediate or intensive care unit were randomized upon admission to our institutional MMPR per usual care (UC) or UC plus sub-dissociative KI for 24 to 72 hours after arrival. The primary outcome was morphine milligram equivalents per day (MME/d) and secondary outcomes included total MME, discharge with an opioid prescription (OP%), and rates of ketamine side effects. Bayesian posterior probabilities (pp) were calculated using neutral priors. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients were included in the final analysis with 144 randomized to KI and 156 to UC. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The injury severity scores for KI were 19 [14, 29] versus UC 22 [14, 29]. The KI group had a lower rate of long-bone fracture (37% versus 49%) and laparotomy (16% versus 24%). Patients receiving KI had an absolute reduction of 7 MME/day, 96 total MME, and 5% in OP%. Additionally, KI had a relative risk (RR) reduction of 19% in MME/day (RR 0.81 [0.69 - 0.95], pp = 99%), 20% in total MME (RR 0.80 [0.64, 0.99], pp = 98%), and 8% in OP% (RR 0.92 [0.76, 1.11], pp = 81%). The KI group had a higher rate of delirium (11% versus 6%); however, rates of other side effects such as arrythmias and unplanned intubations were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Addition of a sub-dissociative ketamine infusion to an oral MMPR resulted in a decrease in opioid exposure in severely injured patients. Sub-dissociative ketamine infusions can be used as a safe adjunct to decrease opioid exposure in monitored settings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I; Therapeutic/Care Management.
RESUMEN
Objective: Among critically injured patients of various blood groups, we sought to compare survival and complication rates between COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative cohorts. Background: SARS-CoV-2 infections have been shown to cause endothelial injury and dysfunctional coagulation. We hypothesized that, among patients with trauma in hemorrhagic shock, COVID-19-positive status would be associated with increased mortality and inpatient complications. As a secondary hypothesis, we suspected group O patients with COVID-19 would experience fewer complications than non-group O patients with COVID-19. Methods: We evaluated all trauma patients admitted 4/2020-7/2020. Patients 16 years or older were included if they presented in hemorrhagic shock and received emergency release blood products. Patients were dichotomized by COVID-19 testing and then divided by blood groups. Results: 3281 patients with trauma were evaluated, and 417 met criteria for analysis. Seven percent (29) of patients were COVID-19 positive; 388 were COVID-19 negative. COVID-19-positive patients experienced higher complication rates than the COVID-19-negative cohort, including acute kidney injury, pneumonia, sepsis, venous thromboembolism, and systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Univariate analysis by blood groups demonstrated that survival for COVID-19-positive group O patients was similar to that of COVID-19-negative patients (79 vs 78%). However, COVID-19-positive non-group O patients had a significantly lower survival (38%). Controlling for age, sex and Injury Severity Score, COVID-19-positive patients had a greater than 70% decreased odds of survival (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.81; p=0.019). Conclusions: COVID-19 status is associated with increased major complications and 70% decreased odds of survival in this group of patients with trauma. However, among patients with COVID-19, blood group O was associated with twofold increased survival over other blood groups. This survival rate was similar to that of patients without COVID-19.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Risk stratification for poor outcomes is not currently age-specific. Risk stratification of older patients based on observational cohorts primarily composed of young patients may result in suboptimal clinical care and inaccurate quality benchmarking. We assessed two hypotheses. First, we hypothesized that risk factors for poor outcomes after trauma are age-dependent and, second, that the relative importance of various risk factors are also age-dependent. METHODS: A cohort study of severely injured adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit 2014-2018 was performed using trauma registry data. Random forest algorithms predicting poor outcomes (death or complication) were built and validated using three cohorts: (1) patients of all ages, (2) younger patients, and (3) older patients. Older patients were defined as aged 55 y or more to maintain consistency with prior trauma literature. Complications assessed included acute renal failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac arrest, unplanned intubation, unplanned intensive care unit admission, and unplanned return to the operating room, as defined by the trauma quality improvement program. Mean decrease in model accuracy (MDA), if each variable was removed and scaled to a Z-score, was calculated. MDA change ≥4 standard deviations between age cohorts was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 5489 patients, 25% were older. Poor outcomes occurred in 12% of younger and 33% of older patients. Head injury was the most important predictor of poor outcome in all cohorts. In the full cohort, age was the most important predictor of poor outcomes after head injury. Within age cohorts, the most important predictors of poor outcomes, after head injury, were surgery requirement in younger patients and arrival Glasgow Coma Scale in older patients. Compared to younger patients, head injury and arrival Glasgow Coma Scale had the greatest increase in importance for older patients, while systolic blood pressure had the greatest decrease in importance. CONCLUSIONS: Supervised machine learning identified differences in risk factors and their relative associations with poor outcomes based on age. Age-specific models may improve hospital benchmarking and identify quality improvement targets for older trauma patients.
Asunto(s)
Traumatismos Craneocerebrales , Adulto , Humanos , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Puntaje de Gravedad del Traumatismo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Edad , Escala de Coma de Glasgow , Aprendizaje Automático , Centros Traumatológicos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Importance: Insurance coverage expansion has been proposed as a solution to improving health disparities, but insurance expansion alone may be insufficient to alleviate care access barriers. Objective: To assess the association of Area Deprivation Index (ADI) with postsurgical textbook outcomes (TO) and presentation acuity for individuals with private insurance or Medicare. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2013-2019) merged with electronic health record data from 3 academic health care systems. Data were analyzed from June 2022 to August 2023. Exposure: Living in a neighborhood with an ADI greater than 85. Main Outcomes and Measures: TO, defined as absence of unplanned reoperations, Clavien-Dindo grade 4 complications, mortality, emergency department visits/observation stays, and readmissions, and presentation acuity, defined as having preoperative acute serious conditions (PASC) and urgent or emergent cases. Results: Among a cohort of 29â¯924 patients, the mean (SD) age was 60.6 (15.6) years; 16â¯424 (54.9%) were female, and 13â¯500 (45.1) were male. A total of 14â¯306 patients had private insurance and 15â¯618 had Medicare. Patients in highly deprived neighborhoods (5536 patients [18.5%]), with an ADI greater than 85, had lower/worse odds of TO in both the private insurance group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99; P = .04) and Medicare group (aOR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82-1.00; P = .04) and higher odds of PASC and urgent or emergent cases. The association of ADIs greater than 85 with TO lost significance after adjusting for PASC and urgent/emergent cases. Differences in the probability of TO between the lowest-risk (ADI ≤85, no PASC, and elective surgery) and highest-risk (ADI >85, PASC, and urgent/emergent surgery) scenarios stratified by frailty were highest for very frail patients (Risk Analysis Index ≥40) with differences of 40.2% and 43.1% for those with private insurance and Medicare, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that patients living in highly deprived neighborhoods had lower/worse odds of TO and higher presentation acuity despite having private insurance or Medicare. These findings suggest that insurance coverage expansion alone is insufficient to overcome health care disparities, possibly due to persistent barriers to preventive care and other complex causes of health inequities.
Asunto(s)
Seguro de Salud , Medicare , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Estados Unidos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios de Cohortes , Características de la Residencia , Enfermedad Aguda , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Background: Patients undergoing trauma laparotomy experience high rates of surgical site infection (SSI). Although intra-operative shock is a likely contributor to SSI risk, little is known about the relation between shock, intra-operative restoration of physiologic normalcy, and SSI development. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of trauma patients who underwent emergent definitive laparotomy was performed. Using shock index and base excess at the beginning and end of laparotomy, patients were classified as normal, persistent shock, resuscitated, or new shock. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of organ/space SSI, superficial/deep SSI, and any SSI. Results: Of 1,191 included patients, 600 (50%) were categorized as no shock, 248 (21%) as resuscitated, 109 (9%) as new shock, and 236 (20%) as persistent shock, with incidence of any SSI as 51 (9%), 28 (11%), 26 (24%), and 32 (14%), respectively. These rates were similar in organ/space and superficial/deep SSIs. On multivariable analysis, resuscitated, new shock, and persistent shock were associated with increased odds of organ/space SSI (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-3.5; p < 0.001) and any SSI (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-3.2; p < 0.001), but no increased risk of superficial/deep SSI (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.6; p = 0.331). Conclusions: Although the trajectory of physiologic status influenced SSI, the presence of shock at any time during trauma laparotomy, regardless of restoration of physiologic normalcy, was associated with increased odds of SSI. Further investigation is warranted to determine the relation between peri-operative shock and SSI in trauma patients.
Asunto(s)
Laparotomía , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica , Humanos , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/epidemiología , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/etiología , Laparotomía/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Estudios Retrospectivos , IncidenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although racial disparities in receipt of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) have been previously reported, prior studies may not have fully assessed the impact of recent advocacy efforts as healthcare disparities gain increased national attention. The aim of this study is to assess more recent racial differences and annual trends in receiving IBR. METHODS: Using the National Surgery Quality Improvement Program database, black or white women over 18 years who underwent mastectomy from 2012 to 2021 were included. IBR was defined by undergoing mastectomy with breast reconstruction during the same anesthetic event. Propensity score analysis was utilized to balance variables between black and white patients. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the effect of race on the odds of receiving IBR. RESULTS: The annual percentage of white patients receiving IBR remained stable at around 50% throughout the study period. The annual percentage of black patients receiving IBR increased from 34% in 2012 to 49% in 2021. Compared with white patients, black patients had lower odds of receiving IBR during the entire study period (odds ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.49-0.67). When assessing annual trends, black patients were less likely to receive IBR each year from 2012 to 2017. By 2021, both races had similar odds of IBR. CONCLUSIONS: Although racial disparities in IBR have been longstanding, this study demonstrates that the racial gap appears to be closing. This may be because of increased awareness of racial disparities and their impact on patient outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Mamoplastia , Femenino , Humanos , Población Negra , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Mastectomía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Negro o Afroamericano , BlancoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Develop an ordinal Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) for surgical outcomes to examine complex associations of Social Determinants of Health. BACKGROUND: Studies focused on single or binary composite outcomes may not detect health disparities. METHODS: Three health care system cohort study using NSQIP (2013-2019) linked with EHR and risk-adjusted for frailty, preoperative acute serious conditions (PASC), case status and operative stress assessing associations of multilevel Social Determinants of Health of race/ethnicity, insurance type (Private 13,957; Medicare 15,198; Medicaid 2835; Uninsured 2963) and Area Deprivation Index (ADI) on DOOR and the binary Textbook Outcomes (TO). RESULTS: Patients living in highly deprived neighborhoods (ADI>85) had higher odds of PASC [adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.13, CI=1.02-1.25, P <0.001] and urgent/emergent cases (aOR=1.23, CI=1.16-1.31, P <0.001). Increased odds of higher/less desirable DOOR scores were associated with patients identifying as Black versus White and on Medicare, Medicaid or Uninsured versus Private insurance. Patients with ADI>85 had lower odds of TO (aOR=0.91, CI=0.85-0.97, P =0.006) until adjusting for insurance. In contrast, patients with ADI>85 had increased odds of higher DOOR (aOR=1.07, CI=1.01-1.14, P <0.021) after adjusting for insurance but similar odds after adjusting for PASC and urgent/emergent cases. CONCLUSIONS: DOOR revealed complex interactions between race/ethnicity, insurance type and neighborhood deprivation. ADI>85 was associated with higher odds of worse DOOR outcomes while TO failed to capture the effect of ADI. Our results suggest that presentation acuity is a critical determinant of worse outcomes in patients in highly deprived neighborhoods and without insurance. Including risk adjustment for living in deprived neighborhoods and urgent/emergent surgeries could improve the accuracy of quality metrics.
Asunto(s)
Etnicidad , Medicare , Anciano , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estudios de Cohortes , Cobertura del Seguro , Medicaid , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Little is known about patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following abdominal trauma. We hypothesized that patients undergoing definitive laparotomy (DEF) would have better PROs compared to those treated with damage control laparotomy (DCL). METHODS: The DCL Trial randomized DEF versus DCL in abdominal trauma. PROs were measured using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D) questionnaire at discharge and six months postdischarge (1 = perfect health, 0 = death, and <0 = worse than death) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist-Civilian. Unadjusted Bayesian analysis with a neutral prior was used to assess the posterior probability of achieving minimal clinically important difference. RESULTS: Of 39 randomized patients (21 DEF versus 18 DCL), 8 patients died (7 DEF versus 1 DCL). Of those who survived, 28 completed the EQ-5D at discharge (12 DEF versus 16 DCL) and 25 at 6 mo (12 DEF versus 13 DCL). Most patients were male (79%) with a median age of 30 (interquartile range (IQR) 21-42), suffered blunt injury (56%), and were severely injured (median injury severity score 33, IQR 21 - 42). Median EQ-5D value at discharge was 0.20 (IQR 0.06 - 0.52) DEF versus 0.31 (IQR -0.03 - 0.43) DCL, and at six months 0.51 (IQR 0.30 - 0.74) DEF versus 0.50 (IQR 0.28 - 0.84) DCL. The posterior probability of minimal clinically important difference DEF versus DCL at discharge and six months was 16% and 23%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Functional deficits for trauma patients persist beyond the acute setting regardless of laparotomy status. These deficits warrant longitudinal studies to better inform patients on recovery expectations.
Asunto(s)
Traumatismos Abdominales , Laparotomía , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Traumatismos Abdominales/diagnóstico , Traumatismos Abdominales/cirugía , Cuidados Posteriores , Teorema de Bayes , Laparotomía/efectos adversos , Alta del Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hypofibrinogenemia has been shown to predict massive transfusion and is associated with higher mortality in severely injured patients. However, the role of empiric fibrinogen replacement in bleeding trauma patients remains controversial. We sought to determine the effect of empiric cryoprecipitate as an adjunct to a balanced transfusion strategy (1:1:1). STUDY DESIGN: This study is a subanalysis of patients treated at the single US trauma center in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Trauma patients (more than 15 years) were eligible if they had evidence of active hemorrhage requiring emergent surgery or interventional radiology, massive transfusion protocol (MTP) activation, and received at least 1 unit of blood. Transfer patients, those with injuries incompatible with life, or those injured more than 3 hours earlier were excluded. Patients were randomized to standard MTP (STANDARD) or MTP plus 3 pools of cryoprecipitate (CRYO). Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality at 28 days. Secondary outcomes were transfusion requirements, intraoperative and postoperative coagulation laboratory values, and quality-of-life measures (Glasgow outcome score-extended). RESULTS: Forty-nine patients (23 in the CRYO group and 26 in the STANDARD group) were enrolled between May 2021 and October 2021. Time to randomization was similar between groups (14 vs 24 minutes, p = 0.676). Median time to cryoprecipitate was 41 minutes (interquartile range 37 to 48). There were no differences in demographics, arrival physiology, laboratory values, or injury severity. Intraoperative and ICU thrombelastography values, including functional fibrinogen, were similar between groups. There was no benefit to CRYO with respect to post-emergency department transfusions (intraoperative and ICU through 24 hours), complications, Glasgow outcome score, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of severely injured, bleeding trauma patients, empiric cryoprecipitate did not improve survival or reduce transfusion requirements. Cryoprecipitate should continue as an "on-demand" addition to a balanced transfusion strategy, guided by laboratory values and should not be given empirically.
Asunto(s)
Hemostáticos , Heridas y Lesiones , Humanos , Coagulación Sanguínea , Transfusión Sanguínea , Fibrinógeno/uso terapéutico , Hemorragia/etiología , Hemorragia/terapia , Heridas y Lesiones/complicaciones , Heridas y Lesiones/terapia , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
Background: Although oral hygiene in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been shown to reduce hospital-associated infections, baseline and progressive oral health are often not reported because of lack of a standardized tool. The Oral Health Risk Assessment Value Index (OHRAVI) is a comprehensive oral assessment validated by dental providers. This study hypothesizes that non-dental providers can use OHRAVI in trauma ICU patients with minimal training and acceptable inter-rater reliability (IRR). Patients and Methods: Dentulous adult patients in the ICU at a level 1 trauma center were scored, excluding those with severe orofacial trauma. The eight categories of the OHRAVI were scored 0 to 3 (best to worst) with summed total and index (average) score. Index scores 1 or less need routine oral care; greater than 1-2 require moderate care; and greater than 2-3 require extensive oromaxillofacial care. Inter-rater reliability was assessed by two to three raters with Krippendorff's α (≥0.80 for good and ≥0.667 for acceptable). Results: Eighty-four ratings were completed across 34 patients, with 16 patients (47%) scored by all three raters. Ten patients (29%) had an index score <1. The average index score for patients was 1.28 (median, 1.34; range, 0.63-2). Krippendorff's α for index score was 0.86. For individual categories, α ranged from 0.44 to 1, with six of the eight categories achieving an α ≥ 0.667. Conclusions: With minimal training, non-dental providers were able to use OHRAVI with a good IRR for index score and an acceptable/good IRR for most individual categories. This novel, simple, comprehensive oral health score could help standardize oral assessment and facilitate future studies of peri-operative oral hygiene interventions.
Asunto(s)
Infección Hospitalaria , Salud Bucal , Adulto , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
Objective: Assess associations of Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) using Area Deprivation Index (ADI), race/ethnicity and insurance type with Textbook Outcomes (TO). Summary Background Data: Individual- and contextual-level SDoH affect health outcomes, but only one SDoH level is usually included. Methods: Three healthcare system cohort study using National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2013-2019) linked with ADI risk-adjusted for frailty, case status and operative stress examining TO/TO components (unplanned reoperations, complications, mortality, Emergency Department/Observation Stays and readmissions). Results: Cohort (34,251 cases) mean age 58.3 [SD=16.0], 54.8% females, 14.1% Hispanics, 11.6% Non-Hispanic Blacks, 21.6% with ADI>85, and 81.8% TO. Racial and ethnic minorities, non-Private insurance, and ADI>85 patients had increased odds of urgent/emergent surgeries (aORs range: 1.17-2.83, all P<.001). Non-Hispanic Black patients, ADI>85 and non-Private insurances had lower TO odds (aORs range: 0.55-0.93, all P<.04), but ADI>85 lost significance after including case status. Urgent/emergent versus elective had lower TO odds (aOR=0.51, P<.001). ADI>85 patients had higher complication and mortality odds. Estimated reduction in TO probability was 9.9% (CI=7.2%-12.6%) for urgent/emergent cases, 7.0% (CI=4.6%-9.3%) for Medicaid, and 1.6% (CI=0.2%-3.0%) for non-Hispanic Black patients. TO probability difference for lowest-risk (White-Private-ADI≤85-elective) to highest-risk (Black-Medicaid-ADI>85-urgent/emergent) was 29.8% for very frail patients. Conclusion: Multi-level SDoH had independent effects on TO, predominately affecting outcomes through increased rates/odds of urgent/emergent surgeries driving complications and worse outcomes. Lowest-risk versus highest-risk scenarios demonstrated the magnitude of intersecting SDoH variables. Combination of insurance type and ADI should be used to identify high-risk patients to redesign care pathways to improve outcomes. Risk adjustment including contextual neighborhood deprivation and patient-level SDoH could reduce unintended consequences of value-based programs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hemorrhagic shock in the setting of traumatic brain injury (TBI) reduces cerebral blood flow and doubles mortality. The optimal resuscitation strategy for hemorrhage in the setting of TBI is unknown. We hypothesized that, among patients presenting with concomitant hemorrhagic shock and TBI, resuscitation including whole blood (WB) is associated with decreased overall and TBI-related mortality when compared with patients receiving component (COMP) therapy alone. METHODS: An a priori subgroup of prospective, observational cohort study of injured patients receiving emergency-release blood products for hemorrhagic shock is reported. Adult trauma patients presenting November 2017 to September 2020 with TBI, defined as a Head Abbreviated Injury Scale of ≥3, were included. Whole blood group patients received any cold-store low-titer Group O WB units. The COMP group received fractionated blood components alone. Overall and TBI-related 30-day mortality, favorable discharge disposition (home or rehabilitation), and 24-hour blood product utilization were assessed. Univariate and inverse probabilities of treatment-weighted multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 564 eligible patients, 341 received WB. Patients who received WB had a higher injury severity score (median, 34 vs. 29), lower scene blood pressure (104 vs. 118), and higher arrival lactate (4.3 vs. 3.6, all p < 0.05). Univariate analysis noted similar overall mortality between WB and COMP; however, weighted multivariable analyses found WB was associated with decreased overall mortality and TBI-related mortality. There were no differences in discharge disposition between the WB group and COMP group. CONCLUSION: In patients with concomitant hemorrhagic shock and TBI, WB transfusion was associated with decreased overall mortality and TBI-related mortality. Whole blood should be considered a first-line therapy for hemorrhage in the setting of TBI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.