Do safety-net hospitals provide equitable care after decompressive surgery for acute cauda equina syndrome?

INTRODUCTION: Safety-net hospitals provide care to a substantial share of disadvantaged patient populations. Whether disparities exist between safety-net hospitals and their counterparts in performing emergent neurosurgical procedures has not yet been examined. OBJECTIVE: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), a national all-payer inpatient healthcare database, to determine whether safety-net hospitals provide equitable care after decompressive surgery for acute cauda equina syndrome (CES). METHODS: The NIS from 2002 to 2011 was queried for patients with a diagnosis of acute CES who received decompressive surgery. Hospital safety-net burden was designated as low (LBH), medium (MBH), or high (HBH) based on the proportion of inpatient admissions that were billed as Medicaid, self-pay, or charity care. Etiologies of CES were classified as degenerative, neoplastic, trauma, and infectious. Significance was defined at p < 0.01. RESULTS: A total of 5607 admissions were included in this analysis. HBHs were more likely than LBHs to treat patients who were Black, Hispanic, on Medicaid, or had a traumatic CES etiology (p < 0.001). After adjusting for patient, hospital, and clinical factors treatment at an HBH was not associated with greater inpatient adverse events (p = 0.611) or LOS (p = 0.082), but was associated with greater inflation-adjusted admission cost (p = 0.001). DISCUSSION: Emergent decompressive surgery for CES performed at SNHs is associated with greater inpatient costs, but not greater inpatient adverse events or LOS. Differences in workflows at SNHs may be the drivers of these disparities in cost and warrant further investigation.

Physician and facility drivers of spending variation in locoregional prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer, with a wide range of treatment options. Payment reform to reduce unnecessary spending variation is an important strategy for reducing waste, but its magnitude and drivers within prostate cancer are unknown. METHODS: In total, 38,971 men aged ≥66 years with localized prostate cancer who were enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service and were included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database from 2009 to 2014 were included. Multilevel linear regression with physician and facility random effects was used to examine the contributions of urologists, radiation oncologists, and their affiliated facilities to variation in total patient spending in the year after diagnosis within geographic region. The authors assessed whether spending variation was driven by patient characteristics, disease risk, or treatments. Physicians and facilities were sorted into quintiles of adjusted patient-level spending, and differences between those that were high-spending and low-spending were examined. RESULTS: Substantial variation in spending was driven by physician and facility factors. Differences in cancer treatment modalities drove more variation across physicians than differences in patient and disease characteristics (72% vs 2% for urologists, 20% vs 18% for radiation oncologists). The highest spending physicians spent 46% more than the lowest and had more imaging tests, inpatient care, and radiotherapy spending. There were no differences across spending quintiles in the use of robotic surgery by urologists or the use of brachytherapy by radiation oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences were observed for patients with similar demographics and disease characteristics. This variation across both physicians and facilities suggests that efforts to reduce unnecessary spending must address decision making at both levels.

Remote Surveillance Technologies: Realizing the Aim of Right Patient, Right Data, Right Time.

The convergence of multiple recent developments in health care information technology and monitoring devices has made possible the creation of remote patient surveillance systems that increase the timeliness and quality of patient care. More convenient, less invasive monitoring devices, including patches, wearables, and biosensors, now allow for continuous physiological data to be gleaned from patients in a variety of care settings across the perioperative experience. These data can be bound into a single data repository, creating so-called data lakes. The high volume and diversity of data in these repositories must be processed into standard formats that can be queried in real time. These data can then be used by sophisticated prediction algorithms currently under development, enabling the early recognition of patterns of clinical deterioration otherwise undetectable to humans. Improved predictions can reduce alarm fatigue. In addition, data are now automatically queriable on a real-time basis such that they can be fed back to clinicians in a time frame that allows for meaningful intervention. These advancements are key components of successful remote surveillance systems. Anesthesiologists have the opportunity to be at the forefront of remote surveillance in the care they provide in the operating room, postanesthesia care unit, and intensive care unit, while also expanding their scope to include high-risk preoperative and postoperative patients on the general care wards. These systems hold the promise of enabling anesthesiologists to detect and intervene upon changes in the clinical status of the patient before adverse events have occurred. Importantly, however, significant barriers still exist to the effective deployment of these technologies and their study in impacting patient outcomes. Studies demonstrating the impact of remote surveillance on patient outcomes are limited. Critical to the impact of the technology are strategies of implementation, including who should receive and respond to alerts and how they should respond. Moreover, the lack of cost-effectiveness data and the uncertainty of whether clinical activities surrounding these technologies will be financially reimbursed remain significant challenges to future scale and sustainability. This narrative review will discuss the evolving technical components of remote surveillance systems, the clinical use cases relevant to the anesthesiologist's practice, the existing evidence for their impact on patients, the barriers that exist to their effective implementation and study, and important considerations regarding sustainability and cost-effectiveness.

Are Publicly Funded Health Databases Geographically Detailed and Timely Enough to Support Patient-Centered Outcomes Research?

Emerging health care research paradigms such as comparative effectiveness research (CER), patient-centered outcome research (PCOR), and precision medicine (PM) share one ultimate goal: constructing evidence to provide the right treatment to the right patient at the right time. We argue that to succeed at this goal, it is crucial to have both timely access to individual-level data and fine geographic granularity in the data. Existing data will continue to be an important resource for observational studies as new data sources are developed. We examined widely used publicly funded health databases and population-based survey systems and found four ways they could be improved to better support the new research paradigms: (1) finer and more consistent geographic granularity, (2) more complete geographic coverage of the US population, (3) shorter time from data collection to data release, and (4) improved environments for restricted data access. We believe that existing data sources, if utilized optimally, and newly developed data infrastructures will both play a key role in expanding our insight into what treatments, at what time, work for each patient.