The impact of frailty on long-term functional outcomes in severely injured geriatric patients.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of severe injury in the geriatric population is increasing. However, the impact of frailty on long-term outcomes after injury in this population remains understudied. Therefore, we aimed to understand the impact of frailty on long-term functional outcomes of severely injured geriatric patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, including patients ≥65 years old with an Injury Severity Score ≥15, who were admitted between December 2015 and April 2022 at one of 3 level 1 trauma centers in our region. Patients were contacted between 6 and 12 months postinjury and administered a trauma quality of life survey, which assessed for the presence of new functional limitations in their activities of daily living. We defined frailty using the mFI-5 validated frailty tool: patients with a score ≥2 out of 5 were considered frail. The impact of frailty on long-term functional outcomes was assessed using 1:1 propensity matching adjusting for patient characteristics, injury characteristics, and hospital site. RESULTS: We included 580 patients, of whom 146 (25.2%) were frail. In a propensity-matched sample of 125 pairs, frail patients reported significantly higher functional limitations than nonfrail patients (69.6% vs 47.2%; P < .001). This difference was most prominent in the following activities: climbing stairs, walking on flat surfaces, going to the bathroom, bathing, and cooking meals. In a subgroup analysis, frail patients with traumatic brain injuries experienced significantly higher long-term functional limitations. CONCLUSION: Frail geriatric patients with severe injury are more likely to have new long-term functional outcomes and may benefit from screening and postdischarge monitoring and rehabilitation services.

The Relationship Between Body Mass Index and Long-Term Outcomes Following Traumatic Injury.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the relationship between body mass index (BMI), a function of mass and height (masskg/height2m) and long-term outcomes among traumatic injury survivors. In this prospective cohort study, we investigate the relationship between BMI and long-term health outcomes in the trauma population. METHODS: Adult trauma survivors with an injury severity score ≥9 admitted to one of three level 1 trauma centers, from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2022, were surveyed via telephone between 6 and 12 mo postinjury. Participants were stratified into one of five groups by BMI at the time of trauma: L-BMI (BMI <18.5), N-BMI (BMI 18.5-24.9), H1-BMI (BMI 25-29.9), H2-BMI (BMI 30-34.9), and H3-BMI (BMI ≥35); N-BMI was used as the referent. Mental and physical health-related quality of life scores, pain, new functional limitations, and hospital readmissions were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare outcomes between study groups. RESULTS: 3830 patients were included. Of those, 124 were L-BMI (3.2%), 1495 N-BMI (39%), 1318 H1-BMI (34.4%), 541 H2-BMI (14.1%), and 352 H3-BMI (9.2%). L-BMI was associated with adverse physical (b = -3.13, CI = -5.71 to -0.55, P = 0.017) and mental health (b = -3.17, CI = -5.87 to -0.46, P = 0.022) outcomes 6-12 mo postinjury compared to the referent. H1-BMI and H2-BMI had higher odds of wo`rse physical outcomes (b = -1.47, CI = -2.42 to -0.52, P = 0.002; b = -3.11, CI = - 4.33 to -1.88, P ≤ 0.001, respectively) and chronic pain (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.24, CI = 1.04-1.47, P = 0.016; aOR = 1.52, CI = 1.21-1.90, P ≤ 0.001, respectively). Patients with H3-BMI had higher odds of worse physical outcomes compared to N-BMI (b = -4.82, CI = -6.28 to -3.37, P ≤ 0.001), chronic pain (aOR = 2.11, CI = 1.61-2.78, P ≤ 0.001), all-cause hospital readmissions (aOR = 1.62, CI = 1.10-2.34, P = 0.013), and new functional limitations (aOR = 1.39, CI = 1.08-1.79, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: BMI variance above or below N-BMI is associated with worse long-term outcomes following traumatic injury.

The impact of health policy on surgical and trauma patients: Three key examples.

Health policy impacts the way surgical and trauma patients access, recover from, and pay for the medical care we deliver. In this editorial, we highlight 3 major policy directives that have or will affect millions of surgical and injured patients-Medicaid expansion, surprise billing, and housing in previously redlined districts. In doing so, we aim to elucidate the mechanisms by which health policies impact our patients and encourage participation and inquiry among surgeons when new health policies are being proposed at a national, state, or local level.

Understanding and Assisting the Recovery of Non-English-Speaking Trauma Survivors: Assessment of the NESTS Pathway.

INTRODUCTION: Spanish-speaking trauma and burn patients have unique needs in their post-discharge care navigation. The confluence of limited English proficiency, injury recovery, mental health, socioeconomic disadvantages, and acute stressors following hospital admission converge to enhance patients' vulnerability, but their specific needs and means of meeting these needs have not been well described. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional survey study describes the results of a multi-institutional initiative devised to help Spanish-speaking trauma and burn patients in their care navigation after hospitalization. The pathway consisted of informational resources, intake and follow up surveys, and multiple points of contact with a community health worker who aids in accessing community resources and navigating the healthcare system. RESULTS: From January 2022-November 2023, there were 114 patients identified as eligible for the NESTS pathway. Of these, 80 (70.2%) were reachable and consented to participate, and 68 of these patients were approached in person during their initial hospitalization. After initial screening, 60 (75.0%) of the eligible patients had a mental health, social services, or other need identified via our survey instrument. During the initial consultation with the CHW, 48 of the 60 patients with any identified need were connected to a resource (80%). Food support was the most prevalent need (N=46, 57.5%). More patients were connected to mental health resources (N=16) than reported need in this domain (N=7). CONCLUSIONS: The NESTS pathway identified the specific needs of Spanish-speaking trauma and burn patients in their recovery, notably food, transportation, and utilities. The pathway also addressed disparities in post-discharge care by connecting patients with community resources, with particular improvement in access to mental healthcare.

Beyond surviving: A scoping review of collaborative care models to inform the future of post-discharge trauma care.

ABSTRACT: Trauma centers demonstrate an impressive ability to save lives, as reflected by inpatient survival rates of over 95% in the United States. Nevertheless, we fail to allocate sufficient effort and resources to ensure that survivors and their families receive the necessary care and support after leaving the trauma center. The objective of this scoping review is to systematically map the research on collaborative care models (CCM) that have been put forward to improve trauma survivorship. Of 833 articles screened, we included 16 studies evaluating eight collaborative care programs, predominantly in the U.S. The majority of the programs offered care coordination and averaged 9-months in duration. Three-fourths of the programs incorporated a mental health provider within their primary team. Observed outcomes were diverse: some models showed increased engagement (e.g., Center for Trauma Survivorship, trauma quality-of-life follow-up clinic), while others presented mixed mental health outcomes and varied results on pain and healthcare utilization. The findings of this study indicate that collaborative interventions may be effective in mental health screening, PTSD and depression management, effective referrals, and improving patient satisfaction with care. A consensus on core elements and cost-effectiveness of CCMs is necessary to set the standard for comprehensive care in post-trauma recovery.

CONTEMPORARY DIAGNOSIS AND MANAGEMENT OF COLORECTAL INJURIES: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW.

ABSTRACT: Colorectal injuries are commonly encountered by trauma surgeons. The management of colorectal injuries has evolved significantly over the past several decades, beginning with wartime experience and subsequently refining with prospective randomized studies. Colon injuries were initially nonoperative, evolved towards fecal diversion for all, then became anatomic based with resection and primary anastomosis with selective diversion, and now primary repair, resection with primary anastomosis, or delayed anastomosis after damage control laparotomy are all commonplace. Rectal injuries were also initially considered non-operative until diversion came into favor. Diversion in addition to direct repair, presacral drain placement, and distal rectal washout became the gold standard for extraperitoneal rectal injuries until drainage and washout fell out of favor. Despite a large body of evidence, there remains debate on the optimal management of some colorectal injuries. This article will focus on how to diagnose and manage colorectal injuries. The aim of this review is to provide an evidence-based summary of the contemporary diagnosis and management of colorectal injuries.

Victory out of tragedy: organ donation.

Major improvements in trauma care during the last decade have improved survival rates in the severely injured. The unintended consequence is the presentation of patients with non-survivable injuries in a time frame in which intervention is considered and often employed due to prognostic uncertainty. In light of this, discerning survivability in these patients remains increasingly problematic. Evidence-based cut-points of futility can guide early decisions for discontinuing aggressive treatment and use of precious resources in severely injured patients arriving in extremis.

Patients Lost to Follow-up After Injury: Who are They and What are Their Long-Term Outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: Trauma patients are at high risk for loss to follow-up (LTFU) after hospital discharge. We sought to identify risk factors for LTFU and investigate associations between LTFU and long-term health outcomes in the trauma population. METHODS: Trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score ≥9 admitted to one of three Level-I trauma centers, 2015-2020, were surveyed via telephone 6 mo after injury. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess factors associated with LTFU and several long-term outcomes. RESULTS: Of 3609 patients analyzed, 808 (22.4%) were LTFU. Patients LTFU were more likely to be male (71% versus 61%, P = 0.001), Black (22% versus 14%, P = 0.003), have high school or lower education (50% versus 42%, P = 0.003), be publicly insured (23% versus 13%, P < 0.001), have a penetrating injury (13% versus 8%, P = 0.006), have a shorter length of stay (3.64 d ± 4.09 versus 5.06 ± 5.99, P < 0.001), and be discharged home without assistance (79% versus 50%, P < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, patients who followed up were more likely to require assistance at home (6% versus 11%; odds ratio [OR] 2.23, 1.26-3.92, P = 0.005), have new functional limitations (11% versus 26%; OR 2.91, 1.97-4.31, P = < 0.001), have daily pain (30% versus 48%; OR 2.11, 1.54-2.88, P = < 0.001), and have more injury-related emergency department visits (7% versus 10%; OR 1.93, 1.15-3.22, P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Vulnerable populations are more likely to be LTFU after injury. Clinicians should be aware of potential racial and socioeconomic disparities in follow-up care after traumatic injury. Future studies investigating improvement strategies in follow-up care should be considered.

Determinants of long-term physical and mental health outcomes after intensive care admission for trauma survivors.

INTRODUCTION: Collectively, studies from medical and surgical intensive care units (ICU) suggest that long-term outcomes are poor for patients who have spent significant time in an ICU. We sought to identify determinants of post-intensive care physical and mental health outcomes 6-12 months after injury. METHODS: Adult trauma patients [ISS ≥9] admitted to one of three Level-1 trauma centers were interviewed 6-12 months post-injury to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Patients requiring ICU admission â€‹≥ â€‹3 days ("ICU patients") were compared with those who did not require ICU admission ("non-ICU patients"). Multivariable regression models were built to identify factors associated with poor outcomes among ICU survivors. RESULTS: 2407 patients were followed [598 (25%) ICU and 1809 (75%) non-ICU patients]. Among ICU patients, 506 (85%) reported physical or mental health symptoms. Of them, 265 (52%) had physical symptoms only, 15 (3%) had mental symptoms only, and 226 (45%) had both physical and mental symptoms. In adjusted analyses, compared to non-ICU patients, ICU patients were more likely to have new limitations for ADLs (OR â€‹= â€‹1.57; 95% CI â€‹= â€‹1.21, 2.03), and worse SF-12 mental (mean Δ â€‹= â€‹-1.43; 95% CI â€‹= â€‹-2.79, -0.09) and physical scores (mean Δ â€‹= â€‹-2.61; 95% CI â€‹= â€‹-3.93, -1.28). Age, female sex, Black race, lower education level, polytrauma, ventilator use, history of psychiatric illness, and delirium during ICU stay were associated with poor outcomes in the ICU-admitted group. CONCLUSIONS: Physical impairment and mental health symptoms following ICU stay are highly prevalent among injury survivors. Modifiable ICU-specific factors such as early liberation from ventilator support and prevention of delirium are potential targets for intervention.

Short-term outcomes of prehospital opioid pain management for older adults with fall-related injury.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are recommended for pain management in patients being cared for and transported by emergency medical services, but no specific guidelines exist for older adults with fall-related injury. Prior research suggests prehospital opioid administration can effectively manage pain in older adults, but less is known about safety in this population. We compared short-term safety outcomes, including delirium, disposition, and length of stay, among older adults with fall-related injury according to whether they received prehospital opioid analgesia. METHODS: We linked Medicare claims data with prehospital patient care reports for older adults (≥65) with fall-related injury in Illinois between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2015. We used weighted regression models (logistic, multinomial logistic, and Poisson) to assess the association between prehospital opioid analgesia and incidence of inpatient delirium, hospital disposition, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 28,150 included older adults, 3% received prehospital opioids. Patients receiving prehospital opioids (vs. no prehospital opioids) were less likely to be discharged home from the emergency department (adjusted probability = 0.30 [95% CI: 0.25, 0.34] vs. 0.47 [95% CI: 0.46, 0.48]), more likely to be discharged to a non-home setting after an inpatient admission (adjusted probability = 0.43 [95% CI: 0.39, 0.48] vs. 0.30 [95% CI: 0.30, 0.31]), had inpatient length of stay 0.4 days shorter (p < 0.001) and ICU length of stay 0.7 days shorter (p = 0.045). Incidence of delirium did not vary between treatment and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Few older adults receive opioid analgesia in the prehospital setting. Prehospital opioid analgesia may be associated with hospital disposition and length of stay for older adults with fall-related injury. However, our findings do not provide evidence of an association with inpatient delirium. These findings should be considered when developing guidelines for prehospital pain management specific to the older adult population.

Innovative blood transfusion strategies to address global blood deserts: a consensus statement from the Blood Delivery via Emerging Strategies for Emergency Remote Transfusion (Blood DESERT) Coalition.

In rural settings worldwide, many people live in effective blood deserts without access to any blood transfusion. The traditional system of blood banking is logistically complex and expensive for many resource-restricted settings and demands innovative and multidisciplinary solutions. 17 international experts in medicine, industry, and policy participated in an exploratory process with a 2-day hybrid seminar centred on three promising innovative strategies for blood transfusions in blood deserts: civilian walking blood banks, intraoperative autotransfusion, and drone-based blood delivery. Participant working groups conducted literature reviews and interviews to develop three white papers focused on the current state and knowledge gaps of each innovation. Seminar discussion focused on defining blood deserts and developing innovation-specific implementation agendas with key research and policy priorities for future work. Moving forward, advocates should prioritise the identification of blood deserts and address the context-specific challenges for these innovations to alleviate the ongoing crisis in blood deserts.

The invisible scars: Unseen financial complications worsen every aspect of long-term health in trauma survivors.

BACKGROUND: Trauma survivors are susceptible to experiencing financial toxicity (FT). Studies have shown the negative impact of FT on chronic illness outcomes. However, there is a notable lack of data on FT in the context of trauma. We aimed to better understand prevalence, risk factors, and impact of FT on trauma long-term outcomes. METHODS: Adult trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥9 treated at Level I trauma centers were interviewed 6 months to 14 months after discharge. Financial toxicity was considered positive if patients reported any of the following due to the injury: income loss, lack of care, newly applied/qualified for governmental assistance, new financial problems, or work loss. The Impact of FT on Patient Reported Outcome Measure Index System (PROMIS) health domains was investigated. RESULTS: Of 577 total patients, 44% (254/567) suffered some form of FT. In the adjusted model, older age (odds ratio [OR], 0.4; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.2-0.81) and stronger social support networks (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.74) were protective against FT. In contrast, having two or more comorbidities (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.01-3.28), lower education levels (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 95%, 1.26-3.03), and injury mechanisms, including road accidents (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.51-4.77) and intentional injuries (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 1.44-12.86) were associated with higher toxicity. No significant relationship was found with ISS, sex, or single-family household. Patients with FT had worse outcomes across all domains of health. There was a negative linear relationship between the severity of FT and worse mental and physical health scores. CONCLUSION: Financial toxicity is associated with long-term outcomes. Incorporating FT risk assessment into recovery care planning may help to identify patients most in need of mitigative interventions across the trauma care continuum to improve trauma recovery. Further investigations to better understand, define, and address FT in trauma care are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Gentrification as a Factor in the Incidence of Firearm Injuries.

Importance: Firearm injuries are an epidemic in the US; more than 45 000 fatal injuries were recorded in 2020 alone. Gaining a deeper understanding of socioeconomic factors that may contribute to increasing firearm injury rates is critical to prevent future injuries. Objective: To explore whether neighborhood gentrification is associated with firearm injury incidence rates over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used nationwide, urban US Census tract-level data on gentrification between 2010 and 2019 and firearm injuries data collected between 2014 and 2019. All urban Census tracts, as defined by Rural Urban Commuting Area codes 1 to 3, were included in the analysis, for a total of 59 379 tracts examined from 2014 through 2019. Data were analyzed from January 2022 through April 2023. Exposure: Gentrification, defined to be an area in a central city neighborhood with median housing prices appreciating over the median regional value and a median household income at or below the 40th percentile of the median regional household income and continuing for at least 2 consecutive years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The number of firearm injuries, controlling for Census tract population characteristics. Results: A total of 59 379 urban Census tracts were evaluated for gentrification; of these tracts, 14 125 (23.8%) were identified as gentrifying, involving approximately 57 million residents annually. The firearm injury incidence rate for gentrifying neighborhoods was 62% higher than the incidence rate in nongentrifying neighborhoods with similar sociodemographic characteristics (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.62; 95% CI, 1.56-1.69). In a multivariable analysis, firearm injury incidence rates increased by 57% per year for low-income Census tracts that did not gentrify (IRR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.56-1.58), 42% per year for high-income tracts that did not gentrify (IRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.41-1.43), and 49% per year for gentrifying tracts (IRR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.48-1.50). Neighborhoods undergoing the gentrification process experienced an additional 26% increase in firearm injury incidence above baseline increase experienced in neighborhoods not undergoing gentrification (IRR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.23-1.30). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study suggest that gentrification is associated with an increase in the incidence of firearm injuries within gentrifying neighborhoods. Social disruption and residential displacement associated with gentrification may help explain this finding, although future research is needed to evaluate the underlying mechanisms. These findings support use of targeted firearm prevention interventions in communities experiencing gentrification.

Loss of independence after traumatic injury: A patient-centered study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes of postdischarge functional status can provide insight into patient recovery experiences not typically reflected in trauma registries. Injuries may be characterized by a long-term loss of independence. We sought to examine factors predictive of patient-reported, postdischarge loss of independence in trauma patients. METHODS: Trauma patients admitted to 1 of 3 level I trauma centers were contacted by phone between 6 to 12 months after hospital discharge to complete the Revised Trauma Quality of Life survey. Loss of independence was defined as a new need for assistance with at least one activity of daily living or transition to living in an institutional setting. Patients with severe traumatic brain injury or spinal cord injury were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of loss of independence. RESULTS: 801 patients were included. The median age was 65 (interquartile range: 46-76) years, 46.1% were female, and the median Injury Severity Score was 9 (interquartile range: 9-13). Two hundred seventy-one patients (33.8%) experienced a loss of independence, most commonly requiring assistance walking up stairs. The main predictors of loss of independence were persistent daily pain (odds ratio: 3.83, 95% confidence interval: [2.90-5.04], P < .001), length of hospital stay (odds ratio: 1.04, 95% confidence interval: [1.01-1.09], P = .021) and income below the national median (odds ratio: 1.46, 95% confidence interval: [1.12-1.91], P = .006). Perceived social support (odds ratio: 0.75, 95% confidence interval: [0.66-0.85], P < .001) was protective against loss of independence. CONCLUSION: Injury is associated with a relatively high rate of long-term loss of independence. Ensuring adequate social support systems for patients postdischarge may help them regain functional independence after injury.

Postdischarge Caregiver Burden Among Family Caregivers of Older Trauma Patients.

Importance: Caregiver burden, characterized by psychological distress and physical morbidity, affects more than 50 million family caregivers of older adults in the United States. Risk factors for caregiver burden among caregivers of older trauma patients have not been well characterized. Objective: To characterize postdischarge caregiver burden among caregivers of older trauma patients and identify targets that can inform interventions to improve their experience. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used a repeated cross-sectional design. Participants were family caregivers for adults 65 years or older with traumatic injury who were discharged from 1 of 2 level I trauma centers. Telephone interviews were conducted at 1 month and 3 months postdischarge with family caregivers (identified by the patient as family or friends who provided unpaid care). Admissions occurred between December 2019 and May 2021, and data were analyzed from June 2021 to May 2022. Exposure: Hospital admission for geriatric trauma. Main Outcome and Measures: High caregiver burden was defined by a score of 17 or higher on the 12-item Zarit Burden Interview. Caregiver self-efficacy and preparedness for caregiving were assessed via the Revised Scale for Caregiving Self-Efficacy and Preparedness for Caregiving Scale, respectively. Associations between caregiver self-efficacy, preparedness for caregiving, and caregiver burden were tested via mixed-effect logistic regression. Results: There were 154 family caregivers enrolled in the study. Their mean (SD) age was 60.6 (13.0) years (range, 18-92 years), 108 of 154 were female (70.6%). The proportion of caregivers experiencing high burden (Zarit Burden Interview score ≥17) was unchanged over time (1 month, 38 caregivers [30.9%]; 3 months, 37 caregivers [31.4%]). Participants with lower caregiver self-efficacy and preparedness for caregiving were more likely to experience greater caregiver burden (odds ratio [OR], 7.79; 95% CI, 2.54-23.82; P < .001; and OR, 5.76; 95% CI, 1.86-17.88; P = .003, respectively). Conclusion and Relevance: This study found that nearly a third of family caregivers of older trauma patients experience high caregiver burden up to 3 months after the patients' discharge. Targeted interventions to increase caregiver self-efficacy and preparedness may reduce caregiver burden in geriatric trauma.

Injury-related emergency department visits and unplanned readmissions are associated with worse long-term mental and physical health.

BACKGROUND: The risk factors for unplanned emergency department (ED) visits and readmission after injury and the impact of these unplanned visits on long-term outcomes are not well understood. We aim to: 1) describe the incidence of and risk factors for injury-related ED visits and unplanned readmissions following injury and, 2) explore the relationship between these unplanned visits and mental and physical health outcomes 6-12 months post-injury. METHODS: Trauma patients with moderate-to-severe injury admitted to one of three Level-I trauma centers were asked to complete a phone survey to assess mental and physical health outcomes at 6-12 months. Patient reported data on injury-related ED visits and readmissions was collected. Multivariable regression analyses were performed controlling for sociodemographic and clinical variables to compare subgroups. RESULTS: Of 7,781 eligible patients, 4675 were contacted and 3,147 completed the survey and were included in the analysis. 194 (6.2%) reported an unplanned injury-related ED visit and 239 (7.6%) reported an injury-related readmission. Risk factors for injury-related ED visits included: younger age, Black race, a lower level of education, Medicaid insurance, baseline psychiatric or substance abuse disorder and penetrating mechanism. Risk factors for unplanned injury-related readmission included younger age, male sex, Medicaid insurance, substance abuse disorder, greater injury severity and penetrating mechanism of injury. Injury-related ED visits and readmissions were associated with significantly higher rates of PTSD, chronic pain and new injury-related functional limitations in addition to lower SF-12 mental and physical composite scores. CONCLUSIONS: Injury-related ED visits and unplanned readmissions are common after hospital discharge following treatment of moderate-severe injury and are associated with worse mental and physical health outcomes.

Defining the emergency general surgery patient population in the era of ICD-10 : Evaluating an established crosswalk from ICD-9 to ICD-10 diagnosis codes.

INTRODUCTION: In 2015, the United States moved from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision ( ICD-9 ), to the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision ( ICD-10 ), coding system. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Committee on Severity Assessment and Patient Outcomes previously established a list of ICD-9 diagnoses to define the field of emergency general surgery (EGS). This study evaluates the general equivalence mapping (GEM) crosswalk to generate an equivalent list of ICD-10 -coded EGS diagnoses. METHODS: The GEM was used to generate a list of ICD-10 codes corresponding to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma ICD-9 EGS diagnosis codes. These individual ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes were aggregated by surgical area and diagnosis groups. The volume of patients admitted with these diagnoses in the National Inpatient Sample in the ICD-9 era (2013-2014) was compared with the ICD-10 volumes to generate observed to expected ratios. The crosswalk was manually reviewed to identify the causes of discrepancies between the ICD-9 and ICD-10 lists. RESULTS: There were 485 ICD-9 codes, across 89 diagnosis categories and 11 surgical areas, which mapped to 1,206 unique ICD-10 codes. A total of 196 (40%) ICD-9 codes have an exact one-to-one match with an ICD-10 code. The median observed to expected ratio among the diagnosis groups for a primary diagnosis was 0.98 (interquartile range, 0.82-1.12). There were five key issues identified with the ability of the GEM to crosswalk ICD-9 EGS diagnoses to ICD-10 : (1) changes in admission volumes, (2) loss of necessary modifiers, (3) lack of specific ICD-10 code, (4) mapping to a different condition, and (5) change in coding nomenclature. CONCLUSION: The GEM provides a reasonable crosswalk for researchers and others to use when attempting to identify EGS patients in with ICD-10 diagnosis codes. However, we identify key issues and deficiencies, which must be accounted for to create an accurate patient cohort. This is essential for ensuring the validity of policy, quality improvement, and clinical research work anchored in ICD-10 coded data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level III.

Early surgery for perforated appendicitis: Are we moving the needle on postoperative abscess?

BACKGROUND: Perforated appendicitis is often managed nonoperatively though upfront surgery is becoming more common. We describe postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing surgery at their index hospitalization for perforated appendicitis. METHODS: We used the 2016-2020 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify patients with appendicitis who underwent appendectomy or partial colectomy. The primary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI). RESULTS: 132,443 patients with appendicitis underwent immediate surgery. Of 14.1% patients with perforated appendicitis, 84.3% underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Intra-abdominal abscess rates were lowest after laparoscopic appendectomy (9.4%). Open appendectomy (OR 5.14, 95% CI 4.06-6.51) and laparoscopic partial colectomy (OR 4.60, 95% CI 2.38-8.89) were associated with higher likelihoods of SSIs. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront surgical management of perforated appendicitis is now predominantly approached by laparoscopy, often without bowel resection. Postoperative complications occurred less frequently with laparoscopic appendectomy compared to other approaches. Laparoscopic appendectomy during the index hospitalization is an effective approach to perforated appendicitis.