Extracorporeal Life Support Use in Mixed Distributive-Obstructive Shock following an Electrical Injury: A Case Report.

Electrical burn injuries can be catastrophic, threatening severe disability or mortality. We present a patient who suffered from electrical shock, requiring bilateral above knee amputations, right trans-radial amputation, renal replacement therapy, and veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (VA ECLS) therapy. While there exist reports of cases that have demonstrated the potential use of ECLS in burn patients with cardiogenic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), this is a unique case of VA ECLS use for an electrical injury patient who developed mixed distributive-obstructive shock secondary to pulmonary embolism and sepsis. Given the wide variety of morbidities that can result from electrical burns, VA ECLS is a promising tool for those who require cardiopulmonary support refractory to traditional measures.

Linking Trauma Registry Patients With Insurance Claims: Creating a Longitudinal Patient Record.

INTRODUCTION: Trauma registries and their quality improvement programs only collect data from the acute hospital admission, and no additional information is captured once the patient is discharged. This lack of long-term data limits these programs' ability to affect change. The goal of this study was to create a longitudinal patient record by linking trauma registry data with third party payer claims data to allow the tracking of these patients after discharge. METHODS: Trauma quality collaborative data (2018-2019) was utilized. Inclusion criteria were patients age ≥18, ISS ≥5 and a length of stay ≥1 d. In-hospital deaths were excluded. A deterministic match was performed with insurance claims records based on the hospital name, date of birth, sex, and dates of service (±1 d). The effect of payer type, ZIP code, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis specificity and exact dates of service on the match rate was analyzed. RESULTS: The overall match rate between these two patient record sources was 27.5%. There was a significantly higher match rate (42.8% versus 6.1%, P < 0.001) for patients with a payer that was contained in the insurance collaborative. In a subanalysis, exact dates of service did not substantially affect this match rate; however, specific International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes (i.e., all 7 characters) reduced this rate by almost half. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the successful linkage of patient records in a trauma registry with their insurance claims. This will allow us to the collect longitudinal information so that we can follow these patients' long-term outcomes and subsequently improve their care.

Association of Discontinuing Preinjury Beta-Adrenergic Blockade Medications With Mortality in Severe Blunt Traumatic Brian Injury.

Background: Beta-adrenergic receptor blocker (BB) administration has been shown to improve survival after traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, studies to date that observe a benefit did not distinguish between continuation of preinjury BB versus de novo initiation of BB. Objectives: To determine the effect of continuation of preinjury BB and de novo initiation of BB on risk-adjusted mortality and complications for patients with TBI. Methods: Trauma quality collaborative data (2016-2021) were analyzed. Patients were excluded with hospitalization <48 hours, direct admission, or penetrating injury. Severe TBI was identified as a head abbreviated injury scale (AIS) value of 3 to 5. Patients were placed into 4 groups based on the preinjury BB use and administration of BB during hospitalization. Propensity score matching was used to create 1:1 matched cohorts of patients for comparisons. Odd ratios of mortality accounting for hospital clustering were calculated. A sensitivity analysis was performed excluding patients with AIS >2 injuries in all other body regions to create a cohort of isolated TBI patients. Results: A total of 15,153 patients treated at 35 trauma centers were available for analysis. Patients were divided into 4 cohort groupings related to preinjury BB use and postinjury receipt of BB. The odds of mortality was significantly reduced for patients with a TBI on a preinjury BB who had the medication continued in the acute setting (as compared with patients on preinjury BB who did not) (odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.98; P = 0.04). Patients with a TBI who were not on preinjury BB did not benefit from de novo initiation of BB with regard to mortality (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.08; P = 0.2). In the sensitivity analysis, excluding polytrauma patients, patients on preinjury BB who had BB continued had a reduction in mortality when compared with patients in which BB was stopped following a TBI (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47-0.91; P = 0.01). Conclusions: Continuing BB is associated with reduced odds of mortality in patients with a TBI on preinjury BB. We were unable to demonstrate benefit from instituting beta blockade in patients who are not on a BB preinjury.

Impact of state opioid laws on prescribing in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Excessive opioid prescribing has resulted in opioid diversion and misuse. In July 2018, Michigan's Public Act 251 established a state-wide policy limiting opioid prescriptions for acute pain to a 7-day supply. Traumatic injury increases the risk for new persistent opioid use, yet the impact of prescribing policy in trauma patients remains unknown. To determine the relationship between policy enactment and prescribing in trauma patients, we compared oral morphine equivalents prescribed at discharge before and after implementation of Public Act 251. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, adult patients who received any oral opioids at discharge from a Level 1 trauma center between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2021, were identified. The exposure was patients admitted starting July 1, 2018. Inpatient oral morphine equivalents per day 48 hours before discharge and discharge prescription oral morphine equivalents per day were calculated. Student's t test and an interrupted time series analysis were performed to compare mean oral morphine equivalents per day pre- and post-policy. Multivariable risk adjustment accounted for patient/injury factors and inpatient oral morphine equivalent use. RESULTS: A total of 3,748 patients were included in the study (pre-policy n = 1,685; post-policy n = 2,063). Implementation of the prescribing policy was associated with a significant decrease in mean discharge oral morphine equivalents per day (34.8 ± 49.5 vs 16.7 ± 32.3, P < .001). After risk adjustment, post-policy discharge prescriptions differed by -19.2 oral morphine equivalents per day (95% CI -21.7 to -16.8, P < .001). The proportion of patients obtaining a refill prescription 30 days post-discharge did not increase after implementation (0.38 ± 0.48 vs 0.37 ± 0.48, P = .7). CONCLUSION: Discharge prescription amounts for opioids in trauma patients decreased by approximately one-half after the implementation of opioid prescribing policies, and there was no compensatory increase in subsequent refill prescriptions. Future work is needed to evaluate the effect of these policies on the adequacy of pain management and functional recovery after injury.

Reducing Sharps Injuries in the Operating Rooms of an Academic Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND: Data on the prevalence and distribution of operating room (OR) sterile field sharps injuries sustained by attending surgeons, residents, scrub nurses, and surgical technologists are limited. The goal of this study is to understand current practices, injuries, and reporting behavior at an academic center, implement interventions, and assess their effect on sharps safety and reporting. METHODS: An electronic survey with questions pertaining to sharps handling practices, injuries, and reporting was e-mailed to 864 staff between July and September 2014. Adjusted analyses for risk of injury were performed. A follow-up survey was sent in January 2018, following the implementation of a shorter injury reporting form and a neutral zone. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 49.3%, with 363 completed surveys. Of respondents, 44.9% reported injuries occurring in the preceding three years. Physicians comprised 65.1% of injured staff and sustained 68.8% of the total injuries. Compared to attending surgeons, residents had a similar likelihood of injury (odds ratio 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-2.2), whereas scrub nurses (odds ratio 0.3, 95% CI 0.17-0.54) and technologists (odds ratio 0.3, 95% CI 0.14-0.76) had a lower likelihood. Half of those injured reported to Occupational Health Services. Of those who did not report, 46.4% stated that time was a limiting factor. Following the interventions, the incidence of injuries among survey respondents remained unchanged. However, 54.0% of respondents stated that it was easier to report injuries. CONCLUSION: Attending surgeons and residents sustain the majority of OR sterile field sharps injuries and are the least likely to report them. Shorter reports made it easier to report the injuries.

Association of Intellectual Disability with Delayed Presentation and Worse Outcomes in Emergency General Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between intellectual disability and both severity of disease and clinical outcomes among patients presenting with common emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions. BACKGROUND: Accurate and timely diagnosis of EGS conditions is crucial for optimal management and patient outcomes. Individuals with intellectual disabilities may be at increased risk of delayed presentation and worse outcomes for EGS; however, little is known about surgical outcomes in this population. METHODS: Using the 2012-2017 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of adult patients admitted for 9 common EGS conditions. We performed multivariable logistic and linear regression to examine the association between intellectual disability and the following outcomes: EGS disease severity at presentation, any surgery, complications, mortality, length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient costs. Analyses were adjusted for patient demographics and facility traits. RESULTS: Of 1,317,572 adult EGS admissions, 5,062 (0.38%) patients had a concurrent ICD-9/-10 code consistent with intellectual disability. EGS patients with intellectual disabilities had 31% higher odds of more severe disease at presentation compared with neurotypical patients (aOR 1.31; 95% CI 1.17-1.48). Intellectual disability was also associated with a higher rate of complications and mortality, longer lengths of stay, lower rate of discharge to home, and higher inpatient costs. CONCLUSION: EGS patients with intellectual disabilities are at increased risk of more severe presentation and worse outcomes. The underlying causes of delayed presentation and worse outcomes must be better characterized to address the disparities in surgical care for this often under-recognized but highly vulnerable population.

The National Provider Identifier Taxonomy: Does it Align With a Surgeon's Actual Clinical Practice?

INTRODUCTION: The taxonomy code(s) associated with each National Provider Identifier (NPI) entry should characterize the provider's role (e.g., physician) and any specialization (e.g., orthopedic surgery). While the intent of the taxonomy system was to monitor medical appropriateness and the expertise of care provided, this system is now being used by researchers to identify providers and their practices. It is unknown how accurate the taxonomy codes are in describing a provider's true specialization. METHODS: Department websites of orthopedic surgery and general surgery from three large academic institutions were queried for practicing surgeons. The surgeon's specialty and subspeciality information listed was compared to the provider's taxonomy code(s) listed on the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES). The match rate between these data sources was evaluated based on the specialty, subspecialty, and institution. RESULTS: There were 295 surgeons (205 general surgery and 90 orthopedic surgery) and 24 relevant taxonomies (8 orthopedic and 16 general or plastic) for analysis. Of these, 294 surgeons (99%) selected their general specialty taxonomy correctly, while only 189 (64%) correctly chose an appropriate subspecialty. General surgeons correctly chose a subspecialty more often than orthopedic surgeons (70 versus 51%, P = 0.002). The institution did not affect either match rate, however there were some differences noted in subspecialty match rates inside individual departments. CONCLUSIONS: In these institutions, the NPI taxonomy is not accurate for describing a surgeon's subspecialty or actual practice. Caution should be taken when utilizing this variable to describe a surgeon's subspecialization as our findings might apply in other groups.

Application of power analysis to determine the optimal reporting time frame for use in statewide trauma system quality reporting.

BACKGROUND: Meaningful reporting of quality metrics relies on detecting a statistical difference when a true difference in performance exists. Larger cohorts and longer time frames can produce higher rates of statistical differences. However, older data are less relevant when attempting to enact change in the clinical setting. The selection of time frames must reflect a balance between being too small (type II errors) and too long (stale data). We explored the use of power analysis to optimize time frame selection for trauma quality reporting. METHODS: Using data from 22 Level III trauma centers, we tested for differences in 4 outcomes within 4 cohorts of patients. With bootstrapping, we calculated the power for rejecting the null hypothesis that no difference exists amongst the centers for different time frames. From the entire sample for each site, we simulated randomly generated datasets. Each simulated dataset was tested for whether a difference was observed from the average. Power was calculated as the percentage of simulated datasets where a difference was observed. This process was repeated for each outcome. RESULTS: The power calculations for the 4 cohorts revealed that the optimal time frame for Level III trauma centers to assess whether a single site's outcomes are different from the overall average was 2 years based on an 80% cutoff. CONCLUSION: Power analysis with simulated datasets allows testing of different time frames to assess outcome differences. This type of analysis allows selection of an optimal time frame for benchmarking of Level III trauma center data.

Evaluating the complex association between Social Vulnerability Index and trauma mortality.

INTRODUCTION: Social determinants of health are known to impact patient-level outcomes, but they are often difficult to measure. The Social Vulnerability Index was created by the Centers for Disease Control to identify vulnerable communities using population-based measures. However, the relationship between SVI and trauma outcomes is poorly understood. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we merged SVI data with a statewide trauma registry and used three analytic models to evaluate the association between SVI quartile and inpatient trauma mortality: (1) an unadjusted model, (2) a claims-based model using only covariates available to claims datasets, and (3) a registry-based model incorporating robust clinical variables collected in accordance with the National Trauma Data Standard. RESULTS: We identified 83,607 adult trauma admissions from January 1, 2017, to September 30, 2020. Higher SVI was associated with worse mortality in the unadjusted model (odds ratio, 1.72 [95% confidence interval, 1.30-2.29] for highest vs. lowest SVI quintile). A weaker association between SVI and mortality was identified after adjusting for covariates common to claims data. Finally, there was no significant association between SVI and inpatient mortality after adjusting for covariates common to robust trauma registries (adjusted odds ratio, 1.10 [95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.53] for highest vs. lowest SVI quintile). Higher SVI was also associated with a higher likelihood of presenting with penetrating injuries, a shock index of >0.9, any Abbreviated Injury Scale score of >5, or in need of a blood transfusion (p < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSION: Patients living in communities with greater social vulnerability are more likely to die after trauma admission. However, after risk adjustment with robust clinical covariates, this association was no longer significant. Our findings suggest that the inequitable burden of trauma mortality is not driven by variation in quality of treatment, but rather in the lethality of injuries. As such, improving trauma survival among high-risk communities will require interventions and policies that target social and structural inequities upstream of trauma center admission. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic / Epidemiologic, Level IV.

Failure to rescue in trauma: Early and late mortality in low- and high-performing trauma centers.

BACKGROUND: Failure to rescue (FTR) is defined as mortality following a complication. Failure to rescue has come under scrutiny as a quality metric to compare trauma centers. In contrast to elective surgery, trauma has an early period of high expected mortality because of injury sequelae rather than a complication. Here, we report FTR in early and late mortality using an externally validated trauma patient database, hypothesizing that centers with higher risk-adjusted mortality rates have higher risk-adjusted FTR rates. METHODS: The study included 114,220 patients at 34 Levels I and II trauma centers in a statewide quality collaborative (2016-2020) with Injury Severity Score of ≥5. Emergency department deaths were excluded. Multivariate regression models were used to produce center-level adjusted rates for mortality and major complications. Centers were ranked on adjusted mortality rate and divided into quintiles. Early deaths (within 48 hours of presentation) and late deaths (after 48 hours) were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 6.7% of patients had a major complication and 3.1% died. There was no difference in the mean risk-adjusted complication rate among the centers. Failure to rescue was significantly different across the quintiles (13.8% at the very low-mortality centers vs. 23.4% at the very-high-mortality centers, p < 0.001). For early deaths, there was no difference in FTR rates among the highest and lowest mortality quintiles. For late deaths, there was a twofold increase in the FTR rate between the lowest and highest mortality centers (9.7% vs. 19.3%, p < 0.001), despite no difference in the rates of major complications (5.9% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.42). CONCLUSION: Low-performing trauma centers have higher mortality rates and lower rates of rescue following major complications. These differences are most evident in patients who survive the first 48 hours after injury. A better understanding of the complications and their role in mortality after 48 hours is an area of interest for quality improvement efforts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

Sources of Postacute Care Episode Payment Variation After Traumatic Hip Fracture Repair Among Medicare Beneficiaries: Cross-Sectional Retrospective Study.

The objective of this study was to evaluate how much variation in postacute care (PAC) spending after traumatic hip fracture exists between hospitals, and to what degree this variation is explained by patient factors, hospital factors, PAC setting, and PAC intensity. Background: Traumatic hip fracture is a common and costly event. This is particularly relevant given our aging population and that a substantial proportion of these patients are discharged to PAC settings. Methods: It is a cross-sectional retrospective study. In a retrospective review using Medicare claims data between 2014 and 2019, we identified PAC payments within 90 days of hospitalization discharges and grouped hospitals into quintiles of PAC spending. The degree of variation present in PAC spending across hospital quintiles was evaluated after accounting for patient case-mix factors and hospital characteristics using multivariable regression models, adjusting for PAC setting choice by fixing the proportion of PAC discharge disposition across hospital quintiles, and adjusting for PAC intensity by fixing the amount of PAC spending across hospital quintiles. The study pool included 125,745 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent operative management for traumatic hip fracture in 2078 hospitals. The primary outcome was PAC spending within 90 days of discharge following hospitalization for traumatic hip fracture. Results: Mean PAC spending varied widely between top versus bottom spending hospital quintiles ($31,831 vs $17,681). After price standardization, the difference between top versus bottom spending hospital quintiles was $8,964. Variation between hospitals decreased substantially after adjustment for PAC setting ($25,392 vs $21,274) or for PAC intensity ($25,082 vs $21,292) with little variation explained by patient or hospital factors. Conclusions: There was significant variation in PAC payments after a traumatic hip fracture between the highest- and lowest-spending hospital quintiles. Most of this variation was explained by choice of PAC discharge setting and intensity of PAC spending, not patient or hospital characteristics. These findings suggest potential systems-level inefficiencies that can be targeted for intervention to improve the appropriateness and value of healthcare spending.

Targeting zero preventable trauma readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 1-in-10 trauma patients in the United States are readmitted within 30 days of discharge, with a median hospital cost of more than $8,000 per readmission. There are national efforts to reduce readmissions in trauma care, but we do not yet understand which are potentially preventable. Our study aims to quantify the potentially preventable readmissions (PPRs) in trauma care to serve as the anchor point for ongoing efforts to curb hospital readmissions and ultimately, bring preventable readmissions to zero. METHODS: We identified inpatient hospitalizations after trauma and readmissions within 90 days in the 2017 National Readmissions Database (NRD). Potentially preventable readmissions were defined as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-defined Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions, in addition to superficial surgical site infection, acute kidney injury/acute renal failure, and aspiration pneumonitis. Mean costs for these admissions were calculated using the NRD. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to characterize the relationship between patient characteristics and PPR. RESULTS: A total of 1,320,083 patients were admitted for trauma care in the 2017 NRD, and 137,854 (10.4%) were readmitted within 90 days of discharge. Of these readmissions, 22.7% were potentially preventable. The mean cost was $10,001/PPR, resulting in $313,802,278 in cost to the US health care system. Of readmitted trauma patients younger than 65 years, Medicaid or Medicare patients had 2.7-fold increased odds of PPRs compared with privately insured patients. Patients of any age with congestive heart failure had 2.9 times increased odds of PPR, those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or complicated diabetes mellitus had 1.8 times increased odds, and those with chronic kidney disease had 1.7 times increased odds. Furthermore, as the days from discharge increased, the proportion of readmissions due to PPRs increased. CONCLUSION: One-in-five trauma readmissions are potentially preventable, which account for more than $300 million annually in health care costs. Improved access to postdischarge ambulatory care may be key to minimizing PPRs, especially for those with certain comorbidities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and value-based evaluations, level II.

Insult to injury: National analysis of return to work and financial outcomes of trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: While much of trauma care is rightly focused on improving inpatient survival, the ultimate goal of recovery is to help patients return to their daily lives after injury. Although the overwhelming majority of trauma patients in the United States survive to hospital discharge, little is known nationally regarding the postdischarge economic burden of injuries among trauma survivors. METHODS: We used the National Health Interview Survey from 2008 to 2017 to identify working-age trauma patients, aged 18 to 64 years, who sustained injuries requiring hospitalization. We used propensity score matching to identify noninjured respondents. Our primary outcome measure was postinjury return to work among trauma patients. Our secondary outcomes included measures of food insecurity, medical debt, accessibility and affordability of health care, and disability. RESULTS: A nationally weighted sample of 319,580 working-age trauma patients were identified. Of these patients, 51.7% were employed at the time of injury, and 58.9% of them had returned to work at the time of interview, at a median of 47 days postdischarge. Higher rates of returning to work were associated with shorter length of hospital stay, higher education level, and private health insurance. Injury was associated with food insecurity at an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.37), with difficulty affording health care at aOR of 1.6 (1.00-2.47), with medical debt at aOR of 2.6 (2.11-3.20), and with foregoing care due to cost at aOR of 2.0 (1.52-2.63). Working-age trauma patients had disability at an aOR of 17.6 (12.93-24.05). CONCLUSION: The postdischarge burden of injury among working-age US trauma survivors is profound-patients report significant limitations in employment, financial security, disability, and functional independence. A better understanding of the long-term impact of injury is necessary to design the interventions needed to optimize postinjury recovery so that trauma survivors can lead productive and fulfilling lives after injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic & Value-Based Evaluations, level II; Prognostic, level II.

Hospital effects drive variation in access to inpatient rehabilitation after trauma.

BACKGROUND: Postacute care rehabilitation is critically important to recover after trauma, but many patients do not have access. A better understanding of the drivers behind inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) use has the potential for major cost-savings as well as higher-quality and more equitable patient care. We sought to quantify the variation in hospital rates of trauma patient discharge to inpatient rehabilitation and understand which factors (patient vs. injury vs. hospital level) contribute the most. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 668,305 adult trauma patients admitted to 900 levels I to IV trauma centers between 2011 and 2015 using the National Trauma Data Bank. Participants were included if they met the following criteria: age >18 years, Injury Severity Score of ≥9, identifiable injury type, and who had one of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services preferred diagnoses for inpatient rehabilitation under the "60% rule." RESULTS: The overall risk- and reliability-adjusted hospital rates of discharge to IRF averaged 18.8% in the nonelderly adult cohort (18-64 years old) and 23.4% in the older adult cohort (65 years or older). Despite controlling for all patient-, injury-, and hospital-level factors, hospital discharge of patients to IRF varied substantially between hospital quintiles and ranged from 9% to 30% in the nonelderly adult cohort and from 7% to 46% in the older adult cohort. Proportions of total variance ranged from 2.4% (patient insurance) to 12.1% (injury-level factors) in the nonelderly adult cohort and from 0.3% (patient-level factors) to 26.0% (unmeasured hospital-level factors) in the older adult cohort. CONCLUSION: Among a cohort of injured patients with diagnoses that are associated with significant rehabilitation needs, the hospital at which a patient receives their care may drive a patient's likelihood of recovering at an IRF just as much, if not more, than their clinical attributes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, level IV.

Factors associated with optimal patient outcomes after operative repair of isolated hip fractures in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Increased time to operative intervention is associated with a greater risk of mortality and complications in adults with a hip fracture. This study sought to determine factors associated with timeliness of operation in elderly patients presenting with an isolated hip fracture and the influence of surgical delay on outcomes. METHODS: Trauma quality collaborative data (July 2016 to June 2019) were analyzed. Inclusion criteria were patients ≥65 years with an injury mechanism of fall, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2005 diagnosis of hip fracture, and AIS extremity ≤3. Exclusion criteria included AIS in other body regions >1 and non-operative management. We examined the association of demographic, hospital, injury presentation, and comorbidity factors on a surgical delay >48 hours and patient outcomes using multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: 10 182 patients fit our study criteria out of 212 620 patients. Mean age was 82.7±8.6 years and 68.7% were female. Delay in operation >48 hours occurred in 965 (9.5%) of patients. Factors that significantly increased mortality or discharge to hospice were increased age, male gender, emergency department hypotension, functionally dependent health status (FDHS), advanced directive, liver disease, angina, and congestive heart failure (CHF). Delay >48 hours was associated with increased mortality or discharge to hospice (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.13 to 2.06; p<0.01). Trauma center verification level, admission service, and hip fracture volume were not associated with mortality or discharge to hospice. Factors associated with operative delay >48 hours were male gender, FDHS, CHF, chronic renal failure, and advanced directive. Admission to the orthopedic surgery service was associated with less incidence of delay >48 hours (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.64; p<0.001). DISCUSSION: Hospital verification level, admission service, and patient volume did not impact the outcome of mortality/discharge to hospice. Delay to operation >48 hours was associated with increased mortality. The only measured modifiable characteristic that reduced delay to operative intervention was admission to the orthopedic surgery service. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Gender Disparity in Trauma Surgery: Compensation, Practice Patterns, Personal Life, and Wellness.

BACKGROUND: We sought to understand differences in surgical practice, compensation, personal life, and health and wellness between male and female trauma surgeons. METHODS: An electronic survey study of members of The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma was carried out. Using univariate and bivariate analyses, we compared the differences in surgical practice, compensation, family life, and health status among female and male trauma surgeons and used chi-squared tests for categorical variables. Analyses were performed using SPSS (Version 25, IBM). RESULTS: The overall response rate was 37.4%. Women reported working more than 80 h a week more commonly (30% versus 23%; P < 0.001), yet reported lower incomes, with 57% of female surgeons reporting before-tax incomes of $300,000 or higher, compared with 83% of male surgeons (P < 0.001). These differences persisted when adjusting for academic versus nonacademic practices. Gender-based salary disparity remained significant when adjusting for the age of the respondent. Divorce rates and never married status were significantly higher for women (9% versus 4%; P < 0.001 and 19% versus 4%; P < 0.001, respectively). Women surgeons also report higher rates of not having children compared with male surgeons (48% versus 13%; P < 0.001). There were no major age-adjusted health status differences reported between male and female surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights contemporary disparities in salaries, practice, and family life between male and female trauma surgeons. Overall, trauma surgeons do not report gender-based differences in health and wellness metrics but have ongoing disparity in compensation and family life.

Does the emergency surgery score accurately predict outcomes in emergent laparotomies?

BACKGROUND: The emergency surgery score is a mortality-risk calculator for emergency general operation patients. We sought to examine whether the emergency surgery score predicts 30-day morbidity and mortality in a high-risk group of patients undergoing emergent laparotomy. METHODS: Using the 2011-2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we identified all patients who underwent emergent laparotomy using (1) the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program definition of "emergent," and (2) all Current Procedural Terminology codes denoting a laparotomy, excluding aortic aneurysm rupture. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to measure the correlation (c-statistic) between the emergency surgery score and (1) 30-day mortality, and (2) 30-day morbidity after emergent laparotomy. As sensitivity analyses, the correlation between the emergency surgery score and 30-day mortality was also evaluated in prespecified subgroups based on Current Procedural Terminology codes. RESULTS: A total of 26,410 emergent laparotomy patients were included. Thirty-day mortality and morbidity were 10.2% and 43.8%, respectively. The emergency surgery score correlated well with mortality (c-statistic = 0.84); scores of 1, 11, and 22 correlated with mortalities of 0.4%, 39%, and 100%, respectively. Similarly, the emergency surgery score correlated well with morbidity (c-statistic = 0.74); scores of 0, 7, and 11 correlated with complication rates of 13%, 58%, and 79%, respectively. The morbidity rates plateaued for scores higher than 11. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the emergency surgery score effectively predicts mortality in patients undergoing emergent (1) splenic, (2) gastroduodenal, (3) intestinal, (4) hepatobiliary, or (5) incarcerated ventral hernia operation. CONCLUSION: The emergency surgery score accurately predicts outcomes in all types of emergent laparotomy patients and may prove valuable as a bedside decision-making tool for patient and family counseling, as well as for adequate risk-adjustment in emergent laparotomy quality benchmarking efforts.

The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) accurately predicts the occurrence of postoperative complications in emergency surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) was recently validated as a scoring system to predict mortality in emergency surgery (ES) patients. We sought to examine the ability of ESS to predict the occurrence of 30-day postoperative complications in ES. METHODS: The 2011-2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was screened for all surgical operations classified as "emergent." Thirty-day postoperative complications were defined as per ACS-NSQIP (e.g., surgical site infection, respiratory failure, acute renal failure). Each patient-related ESS was calculated, and the correlation between ESS and the probability of occurrence of 30-day postoperative complications was assessed by calculating the c-statistic. Univariate and multivariable models were also created to identify which ESS components independently predict complications. RESULTS: Of 37,999 cases that captured all ESS variables, 14,446 (38%) resulted in at least one 30-day complication. The observed probability of a 30-day complication gradually increased from 7% to 53% to 91% at scores of 0, 7, and 15, respectively, with a c-statistic of 0.78. For ESS >15, the complication rate plateaued at a mean of 92%. On multivariable analyses, each of the 22 ESS components independently predicted the occurrence of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: ESS reliably predicts postoperative complications in ES patients. Such a score could prove useful for (1) perioperative patient and family counseling and (2) benchmarking the quality of ES care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.