Variation in Hospital Performance for General Surgery in Younger and Older Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare hospital surgical performance in older and younger patients. BACKGROUND: In-hospital mortality after surgical procedures varies widely among hospitals. Prior studies suggest that failure-to-rescue rates drive this variation for older adults, but the generalizability of these findings to younger patients remains unknown. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients ≥18 years undergoing one of 10 common and complex general surgery operations in 16 states using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Projects State Inpatient Databases (2016-2018). Patients were split into 2 populations: patients with Medicare ≥65 (older adult) and non-Medicare <65 (younger adult). Hospitals were sorted into quintiles using risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates for each age population. Correlations between hospitals in each mortality quintile across age populations were calculated. Complication and failure-to-rescue rates were compared across the highest and lowest mortality quintiles in each age population. RESULTS: We identified 579,582 patients treated in 732 hospitals. The mortality rate was 3.6% among older adults and 0.7% among younger adults. Among older adults, high- relative to low-mortality hospitals had similar complication rates (32.0% vs 29.8%; P = 0.059) and significantly higher failure-to-rescue rates (16.0% vs 4.0%; P < 0.001). Among younger adults, high-relative to low-mortality hospitals had higher complications (15.4% vs 12.1%; P < 0.001) and failure-to-rescue rates (8.3% vs 0.7%; P < 0.001). The correlation between observed-to-expected mortality ratios in each age group was 0.385 ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: High surgical mortality rates in younger patients may be driven by both complication and failure-to-rescue rates. There is little overlap between low-mortality hospitals in the older and younger adult populations. Future work must delve into the root causes of this age-based difference in hospital-level surgical outcomes.

Health System Structure: An Opportunity to Address Structural Racism and Discrimination.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the role of hub-and-spoke systems as a factor in structural racism and discrimination. BACKGROUND: Health systems are often organized in a "hub-and-spoke" manner to centralize complex surgical care to 1 high-volume hospital. Although the surgical health care disparities are well described across health care systems, it is not known how they seem across a single system's hospitals. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent 1 of 10 general surgery operations in 12 geographically diverse states (2016-2018) were identified using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases. System status was assigned using the American Hospital Association dataset. Hub designation was assigned in 2 ways: (1) the hospital performing the most complex operations (general hub) or (2) the hospital performing the most of each specific operation (procedure-specific hub). Independent multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the risk-adjusted odds of treatment at hubs by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: We identified 122,236 patients across 133 hospitals in 43 systems. Most patients were White (73.4%), 14.2% were Black, and 12.4% Hispanic. A smaller proportion of Black and Hispanic patient underwent operations at general hubs compared with White patients (B: 59.6% H: 52.0% W: 62.0%, P <0.001). After adjustment, Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to receive care at hub hospitals relative to White patients for common and complex operations (general hub B: odds ratio: 0.88 CI, 0.85, 0.91 H: OR: 0.82 CI, 0.79, 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: When White, Black, and Hispanic patients seek care at hospital systems, Black and Hispanic patients are less likely to receive treatment at hub hospitals. Given the published advantages of high-volume care, this new finding may highlight an opportunity in the pursuit of health equity.

The Relationship Between Surgeon Gender and Stress During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between surgeon gender and stress during the Covid-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND: Although female surgeons face difficulties integrating work and home in the best of times, the Covid-19 pandemic has presented new challenges. The implications for the female surgical workforce are unknown. METHODS: This cross-sectional, multi-center telephone survey study of surgeons was conducted across 5 academic institutions (May 15-June 5, 2020). The primary outcome was maximum stress level, measured using the validated Stress Numerical Rating Scale-11. Mixed-effects generalized linear models were used to estimate the relationship between surgeon stress level and gender. RESULTS: Of 529 surgeons contacted, 337 surgeons responded and 335 surveys were complete (response rate 63.7%). The majority of female respondents were housestaff (58.1%), and the majority of male respondents were faculty (56.8%) (P = 0.008). A greater proportion of male surgeons (50.3%) than female surgeons (36.8%) had children ≤18 years (P = 0.015). The mean maximum stress level for female surgeons was 7.51 (SD 1.49) and for male surgeons was 6.71 (SD 2.15) (P < 0.001). After adjusting for the presence of children and training status, female gender was associated with a significantly higher maximum stress level (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings that women experienced more stress than men during the Covid-19 pandemic, regardless of parental status, suggest that there is more to the gendered differences in the stress experience of the pandemic than the added demands of childcare. Deliberate interventions are needed to promote and support the female surgical workforce during the pandemic.

Exploring the Experience of the Surgical Workforce During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the stress levels and experience of academic surgeons by training status (eg, housestaff or faculty). BACKGROUND: Covid-19 has uniquely challenged and changed the United States healthcare system. A better understanding of the surgeon experience is necessary to inform proactive workforce management and support. METHODS: A multi-institutional, cross-sectional telephone survey of surgeons was conducted across 5 academic medical centers from May 15 to June 5, 2020. The exposure of interest was training status. The primary outcome was maximum stress level, measured using the validated Stress Numerical Rating Scale-11 (range 0-10). RESULTS: A total of 335 surveys were completed (49.3% housestaff, 50.7% faculty; response rate 63.7%). The mean maximum stress level of faculty was 7.21 (SD 1.81) and of housestaff was 6.86 (SD 2.06) (P = 0.102). Mean stress levels at the time of the survey trended lower amongst housestaff (4.17, SD 1.89) than faculty (4.56, SD 2.15) (P = 0.076). More housestaff (63.6%) than faculty (40.0%) reported exposure to individuals with Covid-19 (P < 0.001). Subjects reported inadequate personal protective equipment in approximately a third of professional exposures, with no difference by training status (P = 0.557). CONCLUSIONS: During the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, the personal and professional experiences of housestaff and faculty differed, in part due to a difference in exposure as well as non-work-related stressors. Workforce safety, including adequate personal protective equipment, expanded benefits (eg, emergency childcare), and deliberate staffing models may help to alleviate the stress associated with disease resurgence or future disasters.

Inefficiencies of care in hub and spoke healthcare systems: A multi-state cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Complex surgical care is often centralized to one high volume (hub) hospital within a system. The benefit of this centralization in common operations is unknown. METHODS: Using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases, adult general surgical patients within hospital systems in 13 states (2016-2018) were identified. Risk-adjusted logistic regression estimated the odds of death or serious morbidity (DSM) and prolonged length of stay (LOS) at hubs relative to other system hospitals (spokes). RESULTS: We identified 122,895 patients across 43 hub-and-spoke systems. Hubs completed 83.2 â€‹% of complex and 59.6 â€‹% of common operations. For complex operations, odds of DSM were significantly lower in hubs (OR: 0.80; 95 â€‹% CI [0.65, 0.98]). For common operations, odds of DSM were similar between hubs and spokes, while odds of prolonged LOS were greater at hubs (OR 1.19; 95 â€‹% CI [1.16,1.24]). CONCLUSIONS: While hub hospitals had lower odds of DSM for complex operation, they had higher odds of prolonged length of stay for common operations. This finding shows an opportunity for improved system efficiency.

Longitudinal evaluation of the surgical workforce experience during the Covid-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: An updated examination of the surgeon experience during the Covid-19 pandemic is lacking. This study sought to describe how surgeon stress levels and sources of stress evolved over the pandemic. METHODS: An electronic survey was administered to surgeons at four academic hospitals at 6-months and 12-months following an initial telephone survey. The primary outcome was stress level and secondary outcomes were the individual stressors. Thematic analysis was applied to free text responses. RESULTS: A total of 103 and 53 responses were received at 6-months and 12-months, respectively. The mean overall stress level was 5.35 (SD 1.89) at 6-months and 4.83 (SD 2.19) at 12-months. Mean number of stressors declined from 3.77 (SD 2.39) to 2.06 (SD 1.60, P < 0.001), though the "finances" stressor increased frequency (27.2% to 34.0%). Similar qualitative themes were identified, however codes for financial and capacity challenges were more prominent at 12-months. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical workforce continues to report elevated levels of stress, though the sources of this stress have changed. Targeted interventions are imperative to protect surgeons from long-term psychological and financial harm.

Clarifying the Role of the Modern General Surgeon: The Effect of Specialization on Inpatient Practice Patterns in General Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The growing concentration of fellowship-trained and integrated residency-trained subspecialty surgeons has encroached on the breadth and volume of a so-called "true" general surgery practice, leaving the role of new general surgeons in flux. We aimed to describe the surgical practice of new general surgeons with and without subspecialty fellowship training. DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, state discharge data was linked to American Medical Association Masterfile and American Hospital Association annual survey data. New-to-practice general surgeons with and without subspecialty board-certification in colorectal surgery (CRS) or cardiothoracic surgery (CTS) were identified in 2008, and followed over 10 years. Surgeon overall inpatient case volume, colorectal resection case volume, and thoracic lobectomy case volume were compared between surgeons with and without related subspecialty training. SETTING: NY and FL (2008-2017). PARTICIPANTS: The study population included 276 new-to-practice surgeons with mean age of 36.9 years. New-to-practice surgeons were defined as those with zero to three years of experience in 2008. RESULTS: Of all surgeons, 11.2% were subspecialty board-certified in CRS and 11.6% were subspecialty board-certified in CTS. Board-certified CRS surgeons performed more colorectal resections than the non-CRS general surgeons each year (p-value <0.001 for all). Overall, non-CRS general surgeons performed 60.7% of all colorectal resections. Board-certified CTS surgeons performed more thoracic lobectomies than non-CTS surgeons each year. Non-CTS surgeons performed 1.1% of all thoracic lobectomies. CONCLUSIONS: On average, new subspecialty surgeons perform significantly more specialty operations than non-subspecialty new general surgeons. However, as a group, new non-colorectal general surgeons perform the majority of colorectal resections. In contrast, new non-cardiothoracic general surgeons perform less than two percent of the thoracic lobectomies. This may have implications for a shift in the training paradigm going forward.

The Effects of the Affordable Care Act on Utilization of Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded Medicaid (ME) and instituted Essential Health Benefits (EHB) that included bariatric surgery coverage on a state-by-state opt-in basis, increasing insurance coverage of bariatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a difference-in-differences framework, changes in bariatric surgery rates, defined as utilization in the population of people with obesity, before and after the ACA were evaluated in four states. Bariatric surgery procedure data were taken from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State In-patient Database 2012-2015. Adjusted multivariable regressions were run in the Medicaid and commercially insured populations. RESULTS: We identified 36,456 bariatric surgeries across the 286 Health Service Areas and time periods, with 31,732 covered by commercial insurers and 4724 covered by Medicaid. An unadjusted increase in utilization rates was seen in the Medicaid and Commercial populations in both ME- and EHB-covered states as well as non-expansion and EHB opt-out states over time. In the Medicaid population, after adjusting for confounders, there was a significant increase of 24.77 cases per 100,000 people with obesity (95% confidence interval: 12.41, 37.13) in the expansion states relative to the control and pre-period. The commercial population experienced a nonsignificant change in the rates of bariatric surgery, decreasing by 2.89 cases per 100,000 people with obesity (95% confidence interval: - 21.59, 15.81). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant increase in bariatric surgery rates among Medicaid beneficiaries associated with Medicaid expansion, but there was no change among the commercially insured.

(Re)thinking the Residential in Residency: Modern Surgical Practice Continues to Move Away From the Inpatient Setting.

PURPOSE: Despite the overall shift in care delivery to an ambulatory setting, the majority of general surgical education still relies on the experience of caring for inpatients. We aimed to investigate how the inpatient practice patterns of newly minted general surgeons (GS) have changed since 2008, in order to better inform education policies regarding both training approach and setting for modern surgical trainees. METHODS: State discharge data from NY and FL (2008-2017) were linked to data on GS from the American Medical Association Masterfile, and to hospital data from the American Hospital Association annual survey. Mean annual inpatient case volume (CV) and case type breadth (CB) were compared between surgeons who were new-to-practice (0-3 years of experience) in 2008 and in 2013. Each new surgeon cohort was followed for 5 years. Case type was classified by organ system. RESULTS: The 2008 cohort included 328 GS with a mean age of 37.1, 79.6% male and 94.2% board-certified. The 2013 cohort included 359 GS with a mean age of 36.2, 73.0% male and 93.9% board-certified. CV was higher among the 2008 cohort than the 2013 cohort for each year of practice in the study period. CB included at least 4 organ system types for all new GS with greater breadth among the 2008 cohort for each year in the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Declining rates of inpatient surgery affect general surgeons who were new-to-practice in 2013 significantly more than those entering practice only 5 years ahead of them. New surgeons continue to start their practices broadly, suggesting a need to continue broad training while expanding formal educational policies to include the full spectrum of ambulatory surgery.

The effects of the Affordable Care Act on access and outcomes of colon surgery.

BACKGROUND: Insurance status has been strongly associated with both access to and outcomes of colon resection (CRS). Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), individual states opted to participate in Medicaid expansion (ME) and adopt essential health benefits (EHB). METHODS: We performed a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences (DID) analysis of 2012-2017 state-level inpatient claims with risk adjustment. We examined frequency of emergent presentation and in-hospital death. Subset analyses were performed by insurance type. RESULTS: Among the 73,961 CRS patients, 49.6% were in a state with both ME and EHB, 34.7% presented emergently, and 2.0% died. Adoption of ME and EHB was associated with a significant, 24%, reduction in the likelihood of in-hospital mortality, and no significant change in emergent presentation for CRS. CONCLUSIONS: The ACA's ME was strongly associated with a decrease in mortality following colon resection among Medicaid beneficiaries. These findings support the adoption of healthcare policies that improve access to insurance.

The impact of the affordable care act on surgeon selection amongst colorectal surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how the Affordable Care Act's state-based Medicaid Expansion (ME) has impacted surgeon selection for colorectal resections (CRS). METHODS: We performed a risk-adjusted DID analysis on state discharge data of CRS patients aged 26-64 from NY (Expansion) and FL (non-Expansion) before (2012-2013) and after (2016-2017) ME. Primary outcome was use of a high-volume or colorectal-boarded surgeon. Subset analysis performed on insurance status. RESULTS: Among 78,866 CRS patients, ME was associated with a 5.9% increase in Medicaid enrollment. ME was associated with a 0.73 (95%CI: 0.67-0.69; p < 0.001) reduced odds of high-volume surgeon usage by commercially insured patients when compared to usage by commercially insured patients in the non-expansion state. No statistically significant difference was noted in the use of a colorectal-boarded surgeon following reform. CONCLUSIONS: ME was associated with an increase in Medicaid enrollment and a decrease in the use of high-volume surgeons by the commercially insured.