Identifying Population-Level and Within-Hospital Disparities in Surgical Care.

INTRODUCTION: The lack of consensus on equity measurement and its incorporation into quality-assessment programs at the hospital and system levels may be a barrier to addressing disparities in surgical care. This study aimed to identify population-level and within-hospital differences in the quality of surgical care provision. METHODS: The analysis included 657 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participating hospitals with over 4 million patients (2014-2018). Multi-level random slope, random intercept modeling was used to examine for population-level and in-hospital disparities. Disparities in surgical care by Area Deprivation Index (ADI), race, and ethnicity were analyzed for five measures: all-case inpatient mortality, all-case urgent readmission, all-case postoperative surgical site infection, colectomy mortality, and spine surgery complications. RESULTS: Population-level disparities were identified across all measures by ADI, two measures for Black race (all-case readmissions and spine surgery complications), and none for Hispanic ethnicity. Disparities remained significant in the adjusted models. Prior to risk-adjustment, in all measures examined, within-hospital disparities were detected in: 25.8-99.8% of hospitals for ADI, 0-6.1% of hospitals for Black race, and 0-0.8% of hospitals for Hispanic ethnicity. Following risk-adjustment, in all measures examined, fewer than 1.1% of hospitals demonstrated disparities by ADI, race, or ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Following risk adjustment, very few hospitals demonstrated significant disparities in care. Disparities were more frequently detected by ADI than by race and ethnicity. The lack of substantial in-hospital disparities may be due to the use of postoperative metrics, small sample sizes, the risk adjustment methodology, and healthcare segregation. Further work should examine surgical access and healthcare segregation.

Avoidable Hospitalizations in the Military Health System, Fiscal Years 2018-2019.

INTRODUCTION: Ongoing health reforms in the Military Health System (MHS) are expected to shift locations of ambulatory care for up to 1.9 million beneficiaries. We sought to model the impact of this policy by determining potentially avoidable hospitalizations in the MHS based on different primary care settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the MHS Data Repository to conduct a retrospective cross-sectional study of TRICARE Prime and Prime Plus beneficiaries aged 18 to 64 years during fiscal years 2018-2019. Crude and adjusted risk ratios for each Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality prevention quality indicator based on primary care setting were calcualated to determine the total probability of admission for any of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality prevention indicators. RESULTS: We identified a total of 260,690 hospital admissions by patients in the MHS with a designated primary care manager (PCM) from fiscal year 2018 to 2019. Of the total admissions, 11,067 (4.25%) were for Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality prevention quality indicators, 3.63% by direct care PCM at a military treatment facility, and 0.61% by a civilian private sector PCM. Risk of admission was lower for private sector PCMs for urinary tract infection, hypertension, perforated appendix, and angina without the procedure. We did not observe a statistically significant adjusted odds ratio of admission in patients managed by private sector PCMs (1.04 adjusted odds ratio; 95% CI, 0.97-1.11). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate no difference in the likelihood of avoidable hospitalizations for beneficiaries with a private sector PCM when looking at all conditions together. Patients with a private sector PCM are protected against hospitalization for several conditions. Our findings indicate no adverse impact on avoidable hospitalizations for beneficiaries transitioned to private sector care from direct care.

Distinguishing Clinical From Statistical Significances in Contemporary Comparative Effectiveness Research.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of clinical significance reporting in contemporary comparative effectiveness research (CER). BACKGROUND: In CER, a statistically significant difference between study groups may or may not be clinically significant. Misinterpreting statistically significant results could lead to inappropriate recommendations that increase health care costs and treatment toxicity. METHODS: CER studies from 2022 issues of the Annals of Surgery , Journal of the American Medical Association , Journal of Clinical Oncology , Journal of Surgical Research , and Journal of the American College of Surgeons were systematically reviewed by 2 different investigators. The primary outcome of interest was whether the authors specified what they considered to be a clinically significant difference in the "Methods." RESULTS: Of 307 reviewed studies, 162 were clinical trials and 145 were observational studies. Authors specified what they considered to be a clinically significant difference in 26 studies (8.5%). Clinical significance was defined using clinically validated standards in 25 studies and subjectively in 1 study. Seven studies (2.3%) recommended a change in clinical decision-making, all with primary outcomes achieving statistical significance. Five (71.4%) of these studies did not have clinical significance defined in their methods. In randomized controlled trials with statistically significant results, sample size was inversely correlated with effect size ( r = -0.30, P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary CER, most authors do not specify what they consider to be a clinically significant difference in study outcome. Most studies recommending a change in clinical decision-making did so based on statistical significance alone, and clinical significance was usually defined with clinically validated standards.

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.

The response of the Military Health System (MHS) to the COVID-19 pandemic: a summary of findings from MHS reviews.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused major disruptions to the US Military Health System (MHS). In this study, we evaluated the MHS response to the pandemic to understand the impact of the pandemic response in a large, national, integrated healthcare system providing care for ~ 9 million beneficiaries. METHODS: We performed a narrative literature review of 16 internal Department of Defense (DoD) reports, including reviews mandated by the US Congress in response to the pandemic. We categorized the findings using the Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy (DOTMLPF-P) framework developed by the DoD to assess system efficiency and effectiveness. RESULTS: The majority of the findings were in the policy, organization, and personnel categories. Key findings showed that the MHS structure to address surge situations was beneficial during the pandemic response, and the rapid growth of telehealth created the potential impact for improved access to routine and specialized care. However, organizational transition contributed to miscommunication and uneven implementation of policies; disruptions affected clinical training, upskilling, and the supply chain; and staffing shortages contributed to burnout among healthcare workers. CONCLUSION: Given its highly integrated, vertical structure, the MHS was in a better position than many civilian healthcare networks to respond efficiently to the pandemic. However, similar to the US civilian sector, the MHS also experienced delays in care, staffing and materiel challenges, and a rapid switch to telehealth. Lessons regarding the importance of communication and preparation for future public health emergency responses are relevant to civilian healthcare systems responding to COVID-19 and other similar public health crises.

The Comparative Effectiveness and Provider-induced Demand Collaboration Project: A Pioneering Military-Civilian Academic Partnership to Build Health Services Research Capacity for the Military Health System.

INTRODUCTION: Like civilian health systems, the United States Military Health System (MHS) confronts challenges in achieving the aims of reducing cost, and improving quality, access, and safety, but historically has lacked coordinated health services research (HSR) capabilities that enabled knowledge translation and iterative learning from its wealth of data. A military-civilian academic partnership called the Comparative Effectiveness and Provider-Induced Demand Collaboration (EPIC), formed in 2011, demonstrated early proof-of-concept in using the MHS claims database for research focused on drivers of variation in health care. This existing partnership was reorganized in 2015 and its topics expanded to meet the need for HSR in support of emerging priorities and to develop current and HSR capacity within the MHS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Donabedian framework of structure, process, and outcomes was applied to support the project, through a core of principal investigators, researchers, analysts, and administrators. Within this framework, new researchers and student trainees learn foundations of HSR while performing secondary analysis of claims data from the MHS Data Repository (MDR) focusing on Health and Readiness, Pediatrics, Policy, Surgery, Trauma, and Women's Health. RESULTS: Since 2015, the project has trained 25 faculty, staff, and providers; 51 students and residents; 21 research fellows across multiple disciplines; and as of 2022, produced 107 peer-reviewed publications and 130 conference presentations, across all five themes and six cores. Research results have been incorporated into Federal and professional policy guidelines. Major research areas include opioid usage and prescribing, value-based care, and racial disparities. EPIC researchers provide direct support to MHS leaders and enabling expertise to clinical providers. CONCLUSIONS: EPIC, through its Donabedian framework and utilization of the MHS Data Repository as a research tool, generates actionable findings and builds capacity for continued HSR across the MHS. Eight years after its reorganization in 2015, EPIC continues to provide a platform for capacity building and knowledge translation.

Development and evaluation of a list of high-risk inpatient procedures in patients 65 years and older.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient procedures are common and important health events for older Americans. To facilitate surgical outcomes research, we sought to create and evaluate lists of International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes for high-risk inpatient procedures, defined as having at least a 1% inpatient mortality. METHODS: This retrospective national cohort study analyzes Medicare claims from 2018 for patients 65 years and older undergoing inpatient procedures. Surgical Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) codes in the inpatient claims were used to identify procedures. We identified the primary ICD-10 procedure code for each patient and then compiled all codes with at least a 1% inpatient mortality yielding three separate lists: one list that was blind to elective versus urgent/emergent status, and one each for urgent/emergent and elective procedures. Clinical review by three surgeons was used to remove procedures unlikely to be the proximate cause of mortality. For evaluation, we examined the mortality of each code among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries in 2017, 2019, and 2020 to determine how many of these satisfied the 1% mortality criterion. RESULTS: This study included 2,241,419 patients from 2018 undergoing inpatient procedures. The final result included 231 (blind to elective vs urgent/emergent status), 167 (urgent/emergent status), and 119 (elective status) ICD-10 procedure codes for the three lists. Our evaluation from 2017, 2019, and 2020 demonstrated that in our master list, which was blind to elective versus urgent/emergent status, 97.8% of procedures had an inpatient mortality of at least 1%. In our high-risk procedures lists for urgent/emergent and elective procedures, 100% and 94.1% of codes met this requirement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and evaluated lists of ICD-10 codes representing high-risk procedures in patients 65 years and older. These lists will be powerful tools for researchers studying surgical outcomes.

Filling the Gaps in the Pandemic Response: Impact of COVID-19 on Telehealth in the Military Health System.

Introduction: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth use became widespread, allowing for continued health care while minimizing COVID-19 transmission risk for patients and providers. This rapid scale-up highlighted shortcomings of the current telehealth infrastructure in many health systems. We aimed to identify and address gaps in the United States Military Health System (MHS) response to the COVID-19 pandemic related to the implementation and utilization of telehealth. Methods: We conducted semistructured key informant interviews of MHS stakeholders, including policymakers, program managers, and health care providers. We recruited respondents using purposive and snowball sampling until we reached thematic saturation. Interviews were conducted virtually from December 2022 to March 2023 and coded by deductive thematic analysis using NVivo. Results: We interviewed 28 key informants. Several themes emerged from the interviews and were categorized into four defined areas of obstacles to the effective utilization of telehealth: administrative, technical, organizational, and quality issues. While respondents had positive perceptions of telehealth, issues such as billing, licensure portability, network connectivity and technology, and ability to monitor health outcomes represent major barriers in the current system, preventing the potential for further expansion. Conclusions: While the shift to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated robust potential within the MHS, it highlighted shortcomings that impair the utility and expansion of telehealth on a level comparable to that of other large health systems. Future focus should be directed toward generating and implementing actionable recommendations that target these identified challenges in the MHS.

How Hospitals Are Addressing The Effects Of Racism: A Mixed-Methods Study Of Hospital Equity Officers.

Hospital equity officers have become critical leaders in the effort to address the determinants of health care disparities, including structural racism. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed a national sample of equity officers and interviewed a subset of respondents to provide additional perspective. About one-half of survey respondents reported at least some obstacles to achieving their health equity objectives, including racist beliefs among people working in their hospitals and health care systems, policies that perpetuate racism, and a lack of staff diversity. To address these challenges, some hospitals are collecting information about instances of racism, reviewing clinical algorithms for evidence of bias, or forming community partnerships. However, in interviews, equity officers pointed out that racism is a public health issue that cannot be adequately addressed solely within the health care system. Given the relative newness of most hospital equity officer positions, our research may be viewed as an early glimpse into the challenges and opportunities of this evolving work.

Development and Validation of a Novel Literature-Based Method to Identify Disparity-Sensitive Surgical Quality Metrics.

BACKGROUND: Disparity in surgical care impedes the delivery of uniformly high-quality care. Metrics that quantify disparity in care can help identify areas for needed intervention. A literature-based Disparity-Sensitive Score (DSS) system for surgical care was adapted by the Metrics for Equitable Access and Care in Surgery (MEASUR) group. The alignment between the MEASUR DSS and Delphi ratings of an expert advisory panel (EAP) regarding the disparity sensitivity of surgical quality metrics was assessed. STUDY DESIGN: Using DSS criteria MEASUR co-investigators scored 534 surgical metrics which were subsequently rated by the EAP. All scores were converted to a 9-point scale. Agreement between the new measurement technique (ie DSS) and an established subjective technique (ie importance and validity ratings) were assessed using the Bland-Altman method, adjusting for the linear relationship between the paired difference and the paired average. The limit of agreement (LOA) was set at 1.96 SD (95%). RESULTS: The percentage of DSS scores inside the LOA was 96.8% (LOA, 0.02 points) for the importance rating and 94.6% (LOA, 1.5 points) for the validity rating. In comparison, 94.4% of the 2 subjective EAP ratings were inside the LOA (0.7 points). CONCLUSIONS: Applying the MEASUR DSS criteria using available literature allowed for identification of disparity-sensitive surgical metrics. The results suggest that this literature-based method of selecting quality metrics may be comparable to more complex consensus-based Delphi methods. In fields with robust literature, literature-based composite scores may be used to select quality metrics rather than assembling consensus panels.

Does Being Poor and Sick Modify the Effect of Individuals on High-Deductible Health Plan (HDHP) Reporting Delayed/Foregone Care?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of being both poor and sick on the association of high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) with delayed/forgone care. FINDINGS: In this cross-sectional study that included 14,203 respondents, representing 120 million Americans, individuals insured by HDHPs had 2.23 times the odds of delayed/foregone care compared with non-HDHP insureds. When examined across strata of income and health status, the association yielded similar odds of delayed/foregone care. Additionally, the interaction of being poor and sick on the association of HDHPs to delayed/foregone care was not statistically significant. Meaning. Being insured on a HDHP affected delayed/foregone care largely consistently, regardless of health, income, or combined health/income category.

Effect of type of definitive treatment on race-based differences in prostate cancer-specific survival.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in prostate cancer (PCa) mortality are partially mediated by inequities in quality of care. Intermediate- and high-risk PCa can be treated with either surgery or radiation, therefore we designed a study to assess the magnitude of race-based differences in cancer-specific survival between these two treatment modalities. METHODS: Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and non-Hispanic White (NHW) men with localized intermediate- and high-risk PCa, treated with surgery or radiation between 2004 and 2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database were included in the study and followed until December 2018. Unadjusted and adjusted survival analyses were employed to compare cancer-specific survival by race and treatment modality. A model with an interaction term between race and treatment was used to assess whether the type of treatment amplified or attenuated the effect of race/ethnicity on prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). RESULTS: 15,178 (20.1%) NHB and 60,225 (79.9%) NHW men were included in the study. NHB men had a higher cumulative incidence of PCSM (p = 0.005) and were significantly more likely to be treated with radiation than NHW men (aOR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.81-1.97, p < 0.001). In the adjusted models, NHB men were significantly more likely to die from PCa compared with NHW men (aHR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.03-1.35, p = 0.014), and radiation was associated with a significantly higher odds of PCSM (aHR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.85-2.38, p < 0.001) compared with surgery. Finally, the interaction between race and treatment on PCSM was not significant, meaning that no race-based differences in PCSM were found within each treatment modality. CONCLUSIONS: NHB men with intermediate- and high-risk PCa had a higher rate of PCSM than NWH men in a large national cancer registry, though NHB and NHW men managed with the same treatment achieved similar PCa survival outcomes. The higher tendency for NHB men to receive radiation was similar in magnitude to the difference in cancer survival between racial and ethnic groups.

Outcomes for patients with dementia undergoing emergency and elective colorectal surgery: A large multi-institutional comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) may result in poor surgical outcomes. The current study aims to characterize the risk of ADRD on outcomes for patients undergoing colorectal surgery. METHODS: Colorectal surgery patients with and without ADRD from 2007 to 2017 were identified using electronic health record-linked Medicare claims data from two large health systems. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed to evaluate postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: 5926 patients (median age 74) underwent colorectal surgery of whom 4.8% (n = 285) had ADRD. ADRD patients were more likely to undergo emergent operations (27.7% vs. 13.6%, p < 0.001) and be discharged to a facility (49.8% vs 28.9%, p < 0.001). After multi-variable adjustment, ADRD patients were more likely to have complications (61.1% vs 48.3%, p < 0.001) and required longer hospitalization (7.1 vs 6.1 days, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of ADRD is an independent risk factor for prolonged hospitalization and postoperative complications after colorectal surgery.

Access to definitive treatment and survival for intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer at hospital systems serving health disparity populations.

INTRODUCTION: Although socioeconomic and racial disparities in prostate cancer (CaP) have been attributed to patient-level and physician-level factors, there is growing interest in investigating the role of the facility of care in driving cancer disparities. We sought to examine the receipt of guideline-concordant definitive treatment, time to treatment initiation (TTI), and overall survival (OS) for men with CaP receiving care at hospital systems serving health disparity populations (HSDPs). METHODS: We retrospective analyzed the National Cancer Database (2004-2016). We identified men with intermediate-risk or high-risk CaP eligible for definitive treatment. The primary outcomes were receipt of definitive treatment and TTI within 90 days of diagnosis. The secondary outcome was OS. We defined HSDPs as minority-serving hospitals-facilities in the highest decile of proportion of non-Hispanic Black (NHB) or Hispanic cancer patients-and/or high-burden safety-net hospitals-facilities in the highest quartile of proportion of underinsured patients. We used mixed-effect models with facility-level random intercept to compare outcomes between HSDPs and non-HSDPs among the entire cohort and among men who received definitive treatment. RESULTS: We included 968 non-HSDPs (72.2%) and 373 HSDPs (27.8%) facilities. Treatment at HSDPs was associated with lower adjusted odds of receipt of definitive treatment (aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.57-0.71; P < 0.001), lower odds of TTI within 90 days of diagnosis (aOR 0.74; 95% CI 0.68-0.79; P < 0.001), and worse OS (aHR 1.05; 95% CI 1.02-1.09; P = .003) when accounting for covariates. However, no difference was found in OS if patients received definitive treatment (aHR 1.03; 95% CI 0.99-1.07; P = 0.1). NHB men at HSDPs had worse outcomes than NHB men treated at non-HSDPs as well as NHW men treated at HSDPs. CONCLUSION: Patients treated at HSDPs were less likely to receive timely definitive treatment and had worse OS, independent of their race. NHB men have worse outcomes than NHW at HSDPs. Thus, NHB men with CaP are doubly disadvantaged since they are more likely to be treated at hospitals with worse outcomes and have worse outcomes than other patients at those same institutions.

US clinicians' perspectives on advance care planning for persons with dementia: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Although advance care planning (ACP) for persons with dementia (PWD) can promote patient-centered care by aligning future healthcare with patient values, few PWD have documented ACPs for reasons incompletely understood. The objective of this paper is to characterize the perceived value of, barriers to, and successful strategies for completing ACP for PWD as reported by frontline clinicians. METHODS: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews (August 2018-December 2019) with clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses, social workers) at 11 US health systems. Interviews asked clinicians about their approaches to ACP with PWDs, including how ACP was initiated, what was discussed, how carepartners were involved, how decision-making was approached, and how decision-making capacity was assessed. RESULTS: Of 75 participating generalist and specialty clinicians from across the United States, 61% reported conducting ACP with PWD, of whom 19% conducted ACP as early as possible with PWD. Three themes emerged: value of early ACP preserves PWD's autonomy in cases of differing PWD carepartner values, acute medical crises, and clinician paternalism; barriers to ACP with PWD including the dynamic and subjective assessment of patient decision-making capacity, inconsistent awareness of cognitive impairment by clinicians, and the need to balance patient and family carepartner involvement; and strategies to support ACP include clarifying clinicians' roles in ACP, standardizing clinicians' approach to PWD and their carepartners, and making time for ACP and decision-making assessments that allow PWD and carepartner involvement regardless of the patients' capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians found early ACP for PWD valuable in promoting patient-centered care among an at-risk population. In sharing their perspectives on conducting ACP for PWD, clinicians described challenges that are amenable to changes in training, workflow, and material support for clinician time. Clinical practices need sustainable scheduling and financial support models.

Long-term Mental Health Trajectories of Injured Military Servicemembers: Comparing Combat to Noncombat Related Injuries.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to quantify the impact of injury characteristics and setting on the development of mental health conditions, comparing combat to noncombat injury mechanisms. BACKGROUND: Due to advances in combat casualty care, military service-members are surviving traumatic injuries at substantial rates. The nature and setting of traumatic injury may influence the development of subsequent mental health disorders more than clinical injury characteristics. METHODS: TRICARE claims data was used to identify servicemembers injured in combat between 2007 and 2011. Controls were servicemembers injured in a noncombat setting matched by age, sex, and injury severity. The rate of development, and time to diagnosis [in days (d)], of 3 common mental health conditions (post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and anxiety) among combat-injured servicemembers were compared to controls. Risk factors for developing a new mental health condition after traumatic injury were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression that controlled for confounders. RESULTS: There were 3979 combat-injured servicemember and 3979 matched controls. The majority of combat injured servicemembers (n = 2524, 63%) were diagnosed with a new mental health condition during the course of follow-up, compared to 36% (n = 1415) of controls ( P < 0.001). In the adjusted model, those with combat-related injury were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with a new mental health condition [odds ratio (OR): 3.18, [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.88-3.50]]. Junior (OR: 3.33, 95%CI: 2.66-4.17) and senior enlisted (OR: 2.56, 95%CI: 2.07-3.17) servicemem-bers were also at significantly greater risk. CONCLUSIONS: We found significantly higher rates of new mental health conditions among servicemembers injured in combat compared to service-members sustaining injuries in noncombat settings. This indicates that injury mechanism and environment are important drivers of mental health sequelae after trauma.

The Hidden Costs of War: Healthcare Utilization Among Individuals Sustaining Combat-related Trauma (2007-2018).

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate long-term healthcare requirements of American military servicemembers with combat-related injuries. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: US military conflicts since 2001 have produced the most combat casualties since Vietnam. Long-term consequences on healthcare utilization and associated costs remain unknown. METHODS: We identified servicemembers who were treated for combat-related injuries between 2007 and 2011. Controls consisted of active-duty servicemembers injured in the civilian sector, without any history of combat-related trauma, matched (1:1) on year of injury, biologic sex injury severity, and age at time of injury. Surveillance was performed through 2018. Total annual healthcare expenditures were evaluated overall and then as expenditures in the first year after injury and for subsequent years. Negative binomial regression was used to identify the adjusted influence of combat injury on healthcare costs. RESULTS: The combat-injured cohort consisted of 3981 individuals and we identified 3979 controls. Total healthcare utilization during the follow-up period resulted in median costs of $142,214 (IQR $61,428, $323,060) per combat-injured servicemember as compared to $50,741 (IQR $26,669, $104,134) among controls. Median expenditures, adjusted for duration of follow-up, for the combat-injured were $45,211 (IQR $18,698, $105,437). In adjusted analysis, overall costs were 30% higher (1.30; 95% confidence interval: 1.23, 1.37) for combat-injured personnel. CONCLUSION: This investigation represents the longest continuous observation of healthcare utilization among individuals after combat injury and the first to assess costs. Expenditures were 30% higher for individuals injured as a result of combat-related trauma when compared to those injured in the civilian sector.

Disparity-Sensitive Measures in Surgical Care: A Delphi Panel Consensus.

BACKGROUND: In the US, disparities in surgical care impede the delivery of uniformly high-quality care to all patients. There is a lack of disparity-sensitive measures related to surgical care. The American College of Surgeons Metrics for Equitable Access and Care in Surgery group, through research and expert consensus, aimed to identify disparity-sensitive measures in surgical care. STUDY DESIGN: An environmental scan, systematic literature review, and subspecialty society surveys were conducted to identify potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures. A modified Delphi process was conducted where panelists rated measures on both importance and validity. In addition, a novel literature-based disparity-sensitive scoring process was used. RESULTS: We identified 841 potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures. From these, our Delphi and literature-based approaches yielded a consensus list of 125 candidate disparity-sensitive measures. These measures were rated as both valid and important and were supported by the existing literature. CONCLUSION: There are profound disparities in surgical care within the US healthcare system. A multidisciplinary Delphi panel identified 125 potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures that could be used to track health disparities, evaluate the impact of focused interventions, and reduce healthcare inequity.