Association of virtual end-of-life care with healthcare outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A population-based study.

The use of virtual care for people at the end-of-life significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, but its association with acute healthcare use and location of death is unknown. The objective of this study was to measure the association between the use of virtual end-of-life care with acute healthcare use and an out-of-hospital death before vs. after the introduction of specialized fee codes that enabled broader delivery of virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a population-based cohort study of 323,995 adults in their last 90 days of life between January 25, 2018 and December 31, 2021 using health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. Primary outcomes were acute healthcare use (emergency department, hospitalization) and location of death (in or out-of-hospital). Prior to March 14, 2020, 13,974 (8%) people received at least 1 virtual end-of-life care visit, which was associated with a 16% higher rate of emergency department use (adjusted Rate Ratio [aRR] 1.16, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.20), a 17% higher rate of hospitalization (aRR 1.17, 95%CI 1.15 to 1.20), and a 34% higher risk of an out-of-hospital death (aRR 1.34, 95%CI 1.31 to 1.37) compared to people who did not receive virtual end-of-life care. After March 14, 2020, 104,165 (71%) people received at least 1 virtual end-of-life care visit, which was associated with a 58% higher rate of an emergency department visit (aRR 1.58, 95%CI 1.54 to 1.62), a 45% higher rate of hospitalization (aRR 1.45, 95%CI 1.42 to 1.47), and a 65% higher risk of an out-of-hospital death (aRR 1.65, 95%CI 1.61 to 1.69) compared to people who did not receive virtual end-of-life care. The use of virtual end-of-life care was associated with higher acute healthcare use in the last 90 days of life and a higher likelihood of dying out-of-hospital, and these rates increased during the pandemic.

Attending physicians' annual service volume and use of virtual end-of-life care: A population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada.

IMPORTANCE: Physicians and their practice behaviors influence access to healthcare and may represent potentially modifiable targets for practice-changing interventions. Use of virtual care at the end-of-life significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, but its association with physician practice behaviors, (e.g., annual service volume) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Measure the association of physicians' annual service volume with their use of virtual end-of-life care (EOLC) and the magnitude of physician-attributable variation in its use, before and during the pandemic. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Population-based cohort study using administrative data of all physicians in Ontario, Canada who cared for adults in the last 90 days of life between 01/25/2018-12/31/2021. Multivariable modified Poisson regression models measured the association between attending physicians' use of virtual EOLC and their annual service volume. We calculated the variance partition coefficients for each regression and stratified by time period before and during the pandemic. EXPOSURE: Annual service volume of a person's attending physician in the preceding year. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Delivery of ≥1 virtual EOLC visit by a person's attending physician and the proportion of variation in its use attributable to physicians. RESULTS: Among the 35,825 unique attending physicians caring for 315,494 adults, use of virtual EOLC was associated with receiving care from a high compared to low service volume attending physician; the magnitude of this association diminished during the pandemic (adjusted RR 1.25 [95% CI 1.14, 1.37] pre-pandemic;1.10 (95% CI 1.08, 1.12) during the pandemic). Physicians accounted for 36% of the variation in virtual EOLC use pre-pandemic and 12% of this variation during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Physicians' annual service volume was associated with use of virtual EOLC and physicians accounted for a substantial proportion of the variation in its use. Physicians may be appropriate and potentially modifiable targets for interventions to modulate use of EOLC delivery.

Association Between Anesthesiologist Sex and Patients' Postoperative Outcomes: A Population-based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of anesthesiologist sex on postoperative outcomes. BACKGROUND: Differences in patient postoperative outcomes exist, depending on whether the primary surgeon is male or female, with better outcomes seen among patients treated by female surgeons. Whether the intraoperative anesthesiologist's sex is associated with differential postoperative patient outcomes is unknown. METHODS: We performed a population-based, retrospective cohort study among adult patients undergoing one of 25 common elective or emergent surgical procedures from 2007 to 2019 in Ontario, Canada. We assessed the association between the sex of the intraoperative anesthesiologist and the primary end point of the adverse postoperative outcome, defined as death, readmission, or complication within 30 days after surgery, using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 1,165,711 patients treated by 3006 surgeons and 1477 anesthesiologists, 311,822 (26.7%) received care from a female anesthesiologist and 853,889 (73.3%) from a male anesthesiologist. Overall, 10.8% of patients experienced one or more adverse postoperative outcomes, of whom 1.1% died. Multivariable adjusted rates of the composite primary end point were higher among patients treated by male anesthesiologists (10.6%) compared with female anesthesiologists (10.4%; adjusted odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.05, P =0.048). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated a significant association between sex of the intraoperative anesthesiologist and patient short-term outcomes after surgery in a large cohort study. This study supports the growing literature of improved patient outcomes among female practitioners. The underlying mechanisms of why outcomes differ between male and female physicians remain elusive and require further in-depth study.

Surgeon Sex and Health Care Costs for Patients Undergoing Common Surgical Procedures.

Importance: Prior research has shown differences in postoperative outcomes for patients treated by female and male surgeons. It is important to understand, from a health system and payer perspective, whether surgical health care costs differ according to the surgeon's sex. Objective: To examine the association between surgeon sex and health care costs among patients undergoing surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, retrospective cohort study included adult patients undergoing 1 of 25 common elective or emergent surgical procedures between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2019, in Ontario, Canada. Analysis was performed from October 2022 to March 2023. Exposure: Surgeon sex. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was total health care costs assessed 1 year following surgery. Secondarily, total health care costs at 30 and 90 days, as well as specific cost categories, were assessed. Generalized estimating equations were used with procedure-level clustering to compare costs between patients undergoing equivalent surgeries performed by female and male surgeons, with further adjustment for patient-, surgeon-, anesthesiologist-, hospital-, and procedure-level covariates. Results: Among 1 165 711 included patients, 151 054 were treated by a female surgeon and 1 014 657 were treated by a male surgeon. Analyzed at the procedure-specific level and accounting for patient-, surgeon-, anesthesiologist-, and hospital-level covariates, 1-year total health care costs were higher for patients treated by male surgeons ($24 882; 95% CI, $20 780-$29 794) than female surgeons ($18 517; 95% CI, $16 080-$21 324) (adjusted absolute difference, $6365; 95% CI, $3491-9238; adjusted relative risk, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.14). Similar patterns were observed at 30 days (adjusted absolute difference, $3115; 95% CI, $1682-$4548) and 90 days (adjusted absolute difference, $4228; 95% CI, $2255-$6202). Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis found lower 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year health care costs for patients treated by female surgeons compared with those treated by male surgeons. These data further underscore the importance of creating inclusive policies and environments supportive of women surgeons to improve recruitment and retention of a more diverse and representative workforce.

The Hockey Stick.

This essay describes the author's experience in interacting with a patient diagnosed with a serious illness and how focusing on the patient's interests and making them happy was an example of a low-tech, high-touch intervention.

Association between patient-surgeon gender concordance and mortality after surgery in the United States: retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient-surgeon gender concordance is associated with mortality of patients after surgery in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Acute care hospitals in the US. PARTICIPANTS: 100% of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65-99 years who had one of 14 major elective or non-elective (emergent or urgent) surgeries in 2016-19. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality after surgery, defined as death within 30 days of the operation. Adjustments were made for patient and surgeon characteristics and hospital fixed effects (effectively comparing patients within the same hospital). RESULTS: Among 2 902 756 patients who had surgery, 1 287 845 (44.4%) had operations done by surgeons of the same gender (1 201 712 (41.4%) male patient and male surgeon, 86 133 (3.0%) female patient and female surgeon) and 1 614 911 (55.6%) were by surgeons of different gender (52 944 (1.8%) male patient and female surgeon, 1 561 967 (53.8%) female patient and male surgeon). Adjusted 30 day mortality after surgery was 2.0% for male patient-male surgeon dyads, 1.7% for male patient-female surgeon dyads, 1.5% for female patient-male surgeon dyads, and 1.3% for female patient-female surgeon dyads. Patient-surgeon gender concordance was associated with a slightly lower mortality for female patients (adjusted risk difference -0.2 percentage point (95% confidence interval -0.3 to -0.1); P<0.001), but a higher mortality for male patients (0.3 (0.2 to 0.5); P<0.001) for elective procedures, although the difference was small and not clinically meaningful. No evidence suggests that operative mortality differed by patient-surgeon gender concordance for non-elective procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Post-operative mortality rates were similar (ie, the difference was small and not clinically meaningful) among the four types of patient-surgeon gender dyads.

Comparison of US emergency departments by HIV priority jurisdiction designation: A case for geographically targeted screening in teaching hospitals.

The Ending the HIV Epidemic (EHE) Initiative targets a subset of United States (US) priority jurisdictions hardest hit by HIV. It remains unclear which emergency departments (EDs) are the most appropriate targets for EHE-related efforts. To explore this, we used the 2001-2019 National Emergency Department Inventories (NEDI)-USA as a framework to characterize all US EDs, focusing on those in priority jurisdictions and those affiliated with a teaching hospital. We then incorporate multivariable regression to explore the association between ED characteristics and location in an HIV priority jurisdiction. Further, to provide context on the communities these EDs serve, demographic and socioeconomic information and sexually transmitted infection case rate data were included. This reflected 2019 US Census Bureau data on age, race, ethnicity, and proportion uninsured and living in poverty along with 2001-2019 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case rate data on chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis. We found that EDs in priority jurisdictions (compared to EDs not in priority jurisdictions) more often served populations emphasized in HIV-related efforts (i.e., Black or African American or Hispanic or Latino populations), communities with higher proportions uninsured and living in poverty, and counties with higher rates of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis. Further, of the groups studied, EDs with teaching hospital affiliations had the highest visit volumes and had steady visit volume growth. In regression, ED annual visit volume was associated with an increased odds of an ED being located in a priority jurisdiction. Our results suggest that geographically targeted screening for HIV in a subset of US priority jurisdiction EDs with a teaching hospital affiliation could be an efficient means to reach vulnerable populations and reduce the burden of undiagnosed HIV in the US.

Surgeon Sex and Long-Term Postoperative Outcomes Among Patients Undergoing Common Surgeries.

Importance: Sex- and gender-based differences in a surgeon's medical practice and communication may be factors in patients' perioperative outcomes. Patients treated by female surgeons have improved 30-day outcomes. However, whether these outcomes persist over longer follow-up has not been assessed. Objective: To examine whether surgeon sex is associated with 90-day and 1-year outcomes among patients undergoing common surgeries. Design, Setting, and Participants: A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted in adults in Ontario, Canada, undergoing 1 of 25 common elective or emergent surgeries between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2019. Analysis was performed between July 15 and October 20, 2022. Exposure: Surgeon sex. Main Outcomes and Measures: An adverse postoperative event, defined as the composite of death, readmission, or complication, was assessed at 90 days and 1 year following surgery. Secondarily, each of these outcomes was assessed individually. Outcomes were compared between patients treated by female and male surgeons using generalized estimating equations with clustering at the level of the surgical procedure, accounting for patient-, procedure-, surgeon-, anesthesiologist-, and facility-level covariates. Results: Among 1 165 711 included patients, 151 054 were treated by a female and 1 014 657 by a male surgeon. Overall, 14.3% of the patients had 1 or more adverse postoperative outcomes at 90 days and 25.0% had 1 or more adverse postoperative outcomes 1 year following surgery. Among these, 2.0% of patients died within 90 days and 4.3% died within 1 year. Multivariable-adjusted rates of the composite end point were higher among patients treated by male than female surgeons at both 90 days (13.9% vs 12.5%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.13) and 1 year (25.0% vs 20.7%; AOR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.12). Similar patterns were observed for mortality at 90 days (0.8% vs 0.5%; AOR 1.25; 95% CI, 1.12-1.39) and 1 year (2.4% vs 1.6%; AOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.13-1.36). Conclusions and Relevance: After accounting for patient, procedure, surgeon, anesthesiologist, and hospital characteristics, the findings of this cohort study suggest that patients treated by female surgeons have lower rates of adverse postoperative outcomes including death at 90 days and 1 year after surgery compared with those treated by male surgeons. These findings further support differences in patient outcomes based on physician sex that warrant deeper study regarding underlying causes and potential solutions.

The Changing Medical Publishing Industry: Economics, Expansion, and Equity.

Medical journal publishing has changed dramatically over the past decade. The shift from print to electronic distribution altered the industry's economic model. This was followed by open access mandates from funding organizations and the subsequent imposition of article processing charges on authors. The medical publishing industry is large and while there is variation across journals, it is overall highly profitable. As journals have moved to digital dissemination, advertising revenues decreased and publishers shifted some of the losses onto authors by way of article processing charges. The number of open access journals has increased substantially in recent years. The open access model presents an equity paradox; while it liberates scientific knowledge for the consumer, it presents barriers to those who produce research. This emerging "pay-to-publish" system offers advantages to authors who work in countries and at institutes with more resources. Finally, the medical publishing industry represents an unusual business model; the people who provide both the content and the external peer review receive no payment from the publisher, who generates revenue from the content. The very unusual economic model of this industry makes it vulnerable to disruptive change. The economic model of medical publishing is rapidly evolving and this will lead to disruption of the industry. These changes will accelerate dissemination of science and may lead to a shift away from lower-impact journals towards pre-print servers.

Comparison of Medical and Mental Health Sequelae Following Hospitalization for COVID-19, Influenza, and Sepsis.

Importance: People who survive hospitalization for COVID-19 are at risk for developing new cardiovascular, neurological, mental health, and inflammatory autoimmune conditions. It is unclear how posthospitalization risks for COVID-19 compare with those for other serious infectious illnesses. Objective: To compare risks of incident cardiovascular, neurological, and mental health conditions and rheumatoid arthritis in 1 year following COVID-19 hospitalization against 3 comparator groups: prepandemic hospitalization for influenza and hospitalization for sepsis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study included all adults hospitalized for COVID-19 between April 1, 2020, and October 31, 2021, historical comparator groups of people hospitalized for influenza or sepsis, and a contemporary comparator group of people hospitalized for sepsis in Ontario, Canada. Exposure: Hospitalization for COVID-19, influenza, or sepsis. Main Outcome and Measures: New occurrence of 13 prespecified conditions, including cardiovascular, neurological, and mental health conditions and rheumatoid arthritis, within 1 year of hospitalization. Results: Of 379 366 included adults (median [IQR] age, 75 [63-85] years; 54% female), there were 26 499 people who survived hospitalization for COVID-19, 299 989 historical controls (17 516 for influenza and 282 473 for sepsis), and 52 878 contemporary controls hospitalized for sepsis. Hospitalization for COVID-19 was associated with an increased 1-year risk of venous thromboembolic disease compared with influenza (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.36-2.31) but with no increased risks of developing selected ischemic and nonischemic cerebrovascular and cardiovascular disorders, neurological disorders, rheumatoid arthritis, or mental health conditions compared with influenza or sepsis cohorts. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, apart from an elevated risk of venous thromboembolism within 1 year, the burden of postacute medical and mental health conditions among those who survived hospitalization for COVID-19 was comparable with other acute infectious illnesses. This suggests that many of the postacute consequences of COVID-19 may be related to the severity of infectious illness necessitating hospitalization rather than being direct consequences of infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Association Between Diabetes and Mortality Among Adult Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Cohort Study of Hospitalized Adults in Ontario, Canada, and Copenhagen, Denmark.

OBJECTIVES: Diabetes has been reported to be associated with an increased risk of death among patients with COVID-19. However, the available studies lack detail on COVID-19 illness severity and measurement of relevant comorbidities. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, retrospective cohort study of patients 18 years of age and older who were hospitalized with COVID-19 between January 1, 2020, and November 30, 2020, in Ontario, Canada, and Copenhagen, Denmark. Chart abstraction emphasizing comorbidities and disease severity was performed by trained research personnel. The association between diabetes and death was measured using Poisson regression. The main outcome measure was in-hospital 30-day risk of death. RESULTS: Our study included 1,133 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Ontario and 305 in Denmark, of whom 405 and 75 patients, respectively, had pre-existing diabetes. In both Ontario and Denmark, patients with diabetes were more likely to be older; have chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, and higher troponin levels; and be receiving antibiotics, when compared with adults without diabetes. In Ontario, 24% (n=96) of adults with diabetes died compared with 15% (n=109) of adults without diabetes. In Denmark, 16% (n=12) of adults with diabetes died in hospital compared with 13% (n=29) of those without diabetes. In Ontario, the crude mortality ratio among patients with diabetes was 1.60 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24 to 2.07) and in the adjusted regression model it was 1.19 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.66). In Denmark, the crude mortality ratio among patients with diabetes was 1.27 (95% CI, 0.68 to 2.36) and in the adjusted model it was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.49 to 1.54). Meta-analysis of the 2 rate ratios from each region resulted in a crude mortality ratio of 1.55 (95% CI, 1.22 to 1.96) and an adjusted mortality ratio of 1.11 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.47). CONCLUSION: The presence of diabetes was not strongly associated with in-hospital COVID-19 mortality independent of illness severity and other comorbidities.

Limited evidence that emergency department care is more costly than other outpatient settings for low-acuity conditions: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Caring for patients with low-acuity conditions in Emergency Departments (ED) is often thought to cost more than treating those patients in other ambulatory settings. Understanding the relative cost of care between settings has critical implications for healthcare policy and system design. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of papers comparing the cost of care for low-acuity and ambulatory care sensitive conditions in ED and other outpatient settings. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science for peer reviewed papers, plus Google for grey literature. We conducted duplicate screening and data extraction, and quality assessment of included studies using an adapted SIGN checklist for economic studies. We calculated an unweighted mean charge ratio across studies and summarized our findings in narrative and tabular format. RESULTS: We identified one study comparing costs. 18 studies assessed physician or facility charges, conducted in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada, including cohort analyses (5), charge analyses (5), survey (1), and database searches (5) assessing populations ranging from 370 participants to 60 million. Charge ratios ranged from 0.60 to 13.45 with an unweighted mean of 4.20. Most (12) studies were of acceptable quality. CONCLUSION: No studies since 2001 assess the comparative costs of ED versus non-ED care for low-acuity ambulatory conditions. Physician and facility charges for ED care are higher than in other ambulatory settings for low-acuity conditions. Empirical evidence is lacking to support that ED care is more costly than similar care in other ambulatory settings.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La prise en charge des patients souffrant d'affections de faible gravité dans les services d'urgence est souvent considérée comme plus coûteuse que la prise en charge de ces mêmes patients dans d'autres structures ambulatoires. Comprendre le coût relatif des soins entre les différents environnements a des implications cruciales pour la politique des soins de santé et la conception des systèmes. MéTHODES: Nous avons procédé à un examen systématique des documents comparant le coût des soins pour les affections à faible gravité et les affections sensibles aux soins ambulatoires dans les services d'urgence et dans d'autres établissements de soins ambulatoires. Nous avons effectué des recherches dans PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL et Web of Science pour les articles évalués par des pairs, ainsi que dans Google pour la littérature grise. Nous avons procédé à une double sélection et à une extraction des données, ainsi qu'à une évaluation de la qualité des études incluses à l'aide d'une liste de contrôle SIGN adaptée aux études économiques. Nous avons calculé un ratio moyen non pondéré pour l'ensemble des études et avons résumé nos conclusions sous forme de texte et de tableau. RéSULTATS: Nous avons identifié une étude comparant les coûts. 18 études ont évalué les frais des médecins ou des établissements, menées aux États-Unis, au Royaume-Uni et au Canada, y compris des analyses de cohortes (5), des analyses de frais (5), des enquêtes (1) et des recherches dans des bases de données (5) évaluant des populations allant de 370 participants à 60 millions de personnes. Les taux d'imputation allaient de 0,60 à 13,45, avec une moyenne non pondérée de 4,20. La plupart des études (12) étaient de qualité acceptable. CONCLUSION: Depuis 2001, aucune étude n'a évalué les coûts comparatifs des soins aux urgences par rapport aux soins hors urgences pour les affections ambulatoires de faible gravité. Les honoraires des médecins et des établissements pour les soins aux urgences sont plus élevés que dans d'autres structures ambulatoires pour les affections de faible gravité. Il n'existe pas de données empiriques permettant d'affirmer que les soins aux urgences sont plus coûteux que des soins similaires dispensés dans d'autres structures ambulatoires.

Complications Following Elective Major Noncardiac Surgery Among Patients With Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Importance: There is an urgent need for evidence to inform preoperative risk assessment for the millions of people who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection and are awaiting elective surgery, which is critical to surgical care planning and informed consent. Objective: To assess the association of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection with death, major adverse cardiovascular events, and rehospitalization after elective major noncardiac surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study included adults who had received a polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 infection within 6 months prior to elective major noncardiac surgery in Ontario, Canada, between April 2020 and October 2021, with 30 days follow-up. Exposures: Positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test result. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the composite of death, major adverse cardiovascular events, and all-cause rehospitalization within 30 days after surgery. Results: Of 71 144 patients who underwent elective major noncardiac surgery (median age, 66 years [IQR, 57-73 years]; 59.8% female), 960 had prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (1.3%) and 70 184 had negative test results (98.7%). Prior infection was not associated with the composite risk of death, major adverse cardiovascular events, and rehospitalization within 30 days of elective major noncardiac surgery (5.3% absolute event rate [n = 3770]; 960 patients with a positive test result; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.68-1.21). There was also no association between prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 and postoperative outcomes when the time between infection and surgery was less than 4 weeks (aRR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.64-2.09) or less than 7 weeks (aRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.56-1.61) and among those who were previously vaccinated (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.52-1.26). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was not associated with death, major adverse cardiovascular events, or rehospitalization following elective major noncardiac surgery, although low event rates and wide 95% CIs do not preclude a potentially meaningful increase in overall risk.

COVID-19 in Canada-The Fourth Through Seventh Waves.

This Viewpoint discusses Canada's experience and response to COVID-19 pandemic­related events during the fourth through seventh waves.

Variation in the risk of death due to COVID-19: An international multicenter cohort study of hospitalized adults.

BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Whether this is related to patient or hospital factors is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of mortality for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and to determine whether the majority of that variation was explained by differences in patient characteristics across sites. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An international multicenter cohort study of hospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 enrolled from 10 hospitals in Ontario, Canada and 8 hospitals in Copenhagen, Denmark between January 1, 2020 and November 11, 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Inpatient mortality. We used a multivariable multilevel regression model to compare the in-hospital mortality risk across hospitals and quantify the variation attributable to patient-level factors. RESULTS: There were 1364 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 in Ontario (n = 1149) and in Denmark (n = 215). In Ontario, the absolute risk of in-hospital mortality ranged from 12.0% to 39.8% across hospitals. Ninety-eight percent of the variation in mortality in Ontario was explained by differences in the characteristics of the patients. In Denmark, the absolute risk of inpatients ranged from 13.8% to 20.6%. One hundred percent of the variation in mortality in Denmark was explained by differences in the characteristics of the inpatients. CONCLUSION: There was wide variation in inpatient COVID-19 mortality across hospitals, which was largely explained by patient-level factors, such as age and severity of presenting illness. However, hospital-level factors that could have affected care, including resource availability and capacity, were not taken into account. These findings highlight potential limitations in comparing crude mortality rates across hospitals for the purposes of reporting on the quality of care.

Association Between Surgeon and Anesthesiologist Sex Discordance and Postoperative Outcomes: A Population-based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of surgeon-anesthesiologist sex discordance on postoperative outcomes. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Optimal surgical outcomes depend on teamwork, with surgeons and anesthesiologists forming two key components. There are sex and sex-based differences in interpersonal communication and medical practice which may contribute to patients' perioperative outcomes. METHODS: We performed a population-based, retrospective cohort study among adult patients undergoing 1 of 25 common elective or emergent surgical procedures from 2007 to 2019 in Ontario, Canada. We assessed the association between differences in sex between surgeon and anesthesiologists (sex discordance) on the primary endpoint of adverse postoperative outcome, defined as death, readmission, or complication within 30 days following surgery using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 1,165,711 patients treated by 3006 surgeons and 1477 anesthesiologists, 791,819 patients were treated by sex concordant teams (male surgeon/male anesthesiologist: 747,327 and female surgeon/female anesthesiologist: 44,492), whereas 373,892 were sex discordant (male surgeon/female anesthesiologist: 267,330 and female surgeon/male anesthesiologist: 106,562). Overall, 12.3% of patients experienced >1 adverse postoperative outcomes of whom 1.3% died. Sex discordance between surgeon and anesthesiologist was not associated with a significant increased likelihood of composite adverse postoperative outcomes (adjusted odds ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.97-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: We did not demonstrate an association between intraoperative surgeon and anesthesiologist sex discordance on adverse postoperative outcomes in a large patient cohort. Patients, clinicians, and administrators may be reassured that physician sex discordance in operating room teams is unlikely to clinically meaningfully affect patient outcomes after surgery.

No Time to Waste: An Appraisal of Value at the End of Life.

OBJECTIVES: The use of economic evaluations of end-of-life interventions may be limited by an incomplete appreciation of how patients and society perceive value at end of life. The objective of this study was to evaluate how patients, caregivers, and society value gains in quantity of life and quality of life (QOL) at the end of life. The validity of the assumptions underlying the use of the quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) as a measure of preferences at end of life was also examined. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched from inception to February 22, 2021. Original research studies reporting empirical data on healthcare priority setting at end of life were included. There was no restriction on the use of either quantitative or qualitative methods. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data from studies. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all included studies. The primary outcomes were the value of gains in quantity of life and the value of gains in QOL at end of life. RESULTS: A total of 51 studies involving 53 981 participants reported that gains in QOL were generally preferred over quantity of life at the end of life across stakeholder groups. Several violations of the underlying assumptions of the QALY to measure preferences at the end of life were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients, caregivers, and members of the general public prioritize gains in QOL over marginal gains in life prolongation at the end of life. These findings suggest that policy evaluations of end-of-life interventions should favor those that improve QOL. QALYs may be an inadequate measure of preferences for end-of-life care thereby limiting their use in formal economic evaluations of end-of-life interventions.