Cost-effectiveness analysis of routine computed tomography angiography (CTA) for lower extremity penetrating trauma.

BACKGROUND: Routine evaluation with CTA for patients with isolated lower extremity penetrating trauma and normal ankle-brachial-indices (ABI) remains controversial. While prior literature has found normal ABI's (≥0.9) and a normal clinical examination to be adequate for safe discharge, there remains concern for missed injuries which could lead to delayed surgical intervention and unnecessary morbidity. Our hypothesis was that routine CTA after isolated lower extremity penetrating trauma with normal ABIs and clinical examination is not cost-effective. METHODS: We performed a decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of obtaining a CTA routinely compared to clinical observation and ABI evaluation in hemodynamically normal patients with isolated penetrating lower extremity trauma. Our base case was a patient that sustained penetrating lower extremity trauma with normal ABIs that received a CTA in the trauma bay. Costs, probability, and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) were generated from published literature. RESULTS: Clinical evaluation only (no CTA) was cost-effective with a cost of $2056.13 and 0.98 QALYs gained compared to routine CTA which had increased costs of $7449.91 and lower QALYs 0.92. Using one-way sensitivity analysis, routine CTA does not become the cost-effective strategy until the cost of a missed injury reaches $210,075.83. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with isolated, penetrating lower extremity trauma with normal ABIs and clinical examination do not warrant routine CTA as there is no benefit with increased costs.

Nonoperative Management in Blunt Splenic Trauma: Can Shock Index Predict Failure?

INTRODUCTION: Predicting failure of nonoperative management (NOM) in splenic trauma remains elusive. Shock index (SI) is an indicator of physiologic burden in an injury but is not used as a prediction tool. The purpose of this study was to determine if elevated SI would be predictive of failure of NOM in patients with a blunt splenic injury. METHODS: Adult patients admitted to a level-1 trauma center from January 2011 to April 2017 for NOM of splenic injury were reviewed. Patients were excluded if they underwent a procedure (angiography or surgery) prior to admission. The primary outcome was requiring intervention after an initial trial of noninterventional management (NIM). An SI > 0.9 at admission was considered a high risk. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predicators of the failure of NOM. Findings were subsequently verified on a validation cohort of patients. RESULTS: Five hundred and eighty-five patients met inclusion criteria; 7.4% failed NIM. On an univariate analysis, findings of pseudoaneurysm or extra-arterial contrast on computed tomography did not differentiate successful NIM versus failure (8.1% versus 14.0%, P = 0.18). Age, the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma injury grade, and elevated SI were included in multivariate modeling. Grade of injury (OR 3.49, P = 0.001), age (OR 1.02, P = 0.009), and high SI (OR 3.49, P = 0.001) were each independently significant for NIM failure. The risk-adjusted odds of failure were significantly higher in patients with a high risk SI (OR 2.35, P < 0.001). Validation of these findings was confirmed for high SI on a subsequent 406 patients with a c-statistic of 0.71 (95% CI 0.62-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated SI is an independent risk factor for failure of NIM in those with splenic injury. SI along with age and computed tomography findings may aid in predicting the failure of NIM. Trauma providers should incorporate SI into decision-making tools for splenic injury management.

Does Abdominal Seat Belt Sign Warrant Admission After a Negative CT Scan? A Cost-Utility Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Rapid deceleration against a seat belt during a motor vehicle collision (MVC) may result in an abdominal seat belt sign (ASBS), which is associated with a higher risk of hollow viscus injury (HVI). After a negative abdominal CT scan, management of patients with ASBS is variable, but recent evidence suggests emergency department (ED) discharge may be safe. Therefore, we hypothesized that discharge from the ED is cost-effective compared with 23-h observation or hospital admission for patients with ASBS and a negative CT. METHODS: A cost-utility model was developed for an evaluable patient with ASBS and negative CT scan using TreeAge software. ED discharge was compared with 23-h observation and admission. Analysis was from a health care-based third-party payer perspective. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were based on 3-y expected outcomes. Probability and costs were estimated from published literature and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. RESULTS: In our base case, ED discharge was the most cost-effective strategy, yielding a cost of $706 with 2.86 QALYs. The average costs of 23-h observation and hospital admission were $2600 and $8,827, respectively, with 2.87 QALYs gained each. The strategy of ED observation becomes cost-effective when the rate of HVI after ED discharge exceeds 2.3%. In a Monte Carlo simulation, ED discharge was the optimal strategy in 91% of 1000 trials of the model. CONCLUSIONS: ED discharge is a cost-effective strategy for evaluable patients with ASBS and a negative abdominal CT and remains so when the risk of HVI after ED discharge is higher than currently assumed.

Splenic artery angioembolization for high-grade splenic injury: Are we wasting money?

BACKGROUND: Non-operative management (NOM) is accepted treatment of splenic injury, but this may fail leading to splenectomy. Splenic artery embolization (SAE) may improve rate of salvage. The purpose is to determine the cost-utility of the addition of SAE for high-grade splenic injuries. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was developed to compared NOM to SAE in patients with blunt splenic injury. Sensitivity analysis was completed to account for uncertainty. Utility outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALY). RESULTS: For patients with grade III, IV and V injury NOM is the dominant strategy. The probability of NOM being the more cost-effective strategy is 87.5% in patients with grade V splenic injury. SAE is not the favored strategy unless the probability of failure of NOM is greater than 70.0%. CONCLUSION: For grade III-V injuries, NOM without SAE yields more quality-adjusted life years. NOM without SAE is the most cost-effective strategy for high-grade splenic injuries.

Is a chest radiograph after thoracostomy tube removal necessary? A cost-effective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following placement of tube thoracostomy (TT) for evacuation of traumatic hemopneumothorax (HPTX), controversy persists over the need for routine post-TT removal chest radiograph (CXR). Current research demonstrates routine CXR may offer no advantage over clinical observation alone while simultaneously increasing hospital resource utilization. As such, we hypothesized that in resolved traumatic HPTXs routine post-TT removal CXR to assess recurrent PTX compared to clinical observation is not cost-effective. METHODS: We performed a decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine CXR compared to clinical observation following TT removal. Our base case was a patient that sustained thoracic trauma with radiographic and clinical resolution of HPTX following TT evacuation. Cost, utility and probability estimates were generated from published literature, with costs represented in 2019 US dollars and utilities in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Decision-analytic model identified that clinical observation after TT removal was the dominant strategy with increased benefit at less cost, when compared to routine CXR, with a net cost of $194.92, QALYs of 0.44. In comparison, routine CXR demonstrated an increase of $821.42 in cost with 0.43 QALYs. On probabilistic sensitivity analysis the clinical observation strategy was found cost-effective in 99.5% of 10,000 iterations. CONCLUSION: In trauma patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of a resolved HPTX, the adoption of clinical observation in lieu of post-TT removal CXR is cost-effective. Routine CXR following TT removal accrues more cost without additional benefit. The practice of routinely obtaining a CXR following TT removal should be scrutinized.

Stop flailing: The impact of bicortically displaced rib fractures on pulmonary outcomes in patients with chest trauma - an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma multi-institutional study.

BACKGROUND: Current evaluation of rib fractures focuses almost exclusively on flail chest with little attention on bicortically displaced fractures. Chest trauma that is severe enough to cause fractures leads to worse outcomes. An association between bicortically displaced rib fractures and pulmonary outcomes would potentially change patient care in the setting of trauma. We tested the hypothesis that bicortically displaced fractures were an important clinical marker for pulmonary outcomes in patients with nonflail rib fractures. METHODS: This nine-center American Association for the Surgery of Trauma multi-institutional study analyzed adults with two or more rib fractures. Admission computerized tomography scans were independently reviewed. The location, degree of rib fractures, and pulmonary contusions were categorized. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and tracheostomy. Analyses were performed in nonflail patients and also while controlling for flail chest to determine if bicortically displaced fractures were independently associated with outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 1,110 patients, 103 (9.3%) developed pneumonia, 78 (7.0%) required tracheostomy, and 30 (2.7%) developed ARDS. Bicortically displaced fractures were present in 277 (25%) of patients and in 206 (20.3%) of patients without flail chest. After adjusting for patient demographics, injury, and admission physiology, negative pulmonary outcomes occurred over twice as frequently in those with bicortically displaced fractures without flail chest (n = 206) when compared with those without bicortically displaced fractures-pneumonia (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.6), ARDS (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0-6.8), and tracheostomy (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.4-5.2). When adjusting for the presence of flail chest, bicortically displaced fractures remained an independent predictor of pneumonia, tracheostomy, and ARDS. CONCLUSION: Patients with bicortically displaced rib fractures are more likely to develop pneumonia, ARDS, and need for tracheostomy even when controlling for flail chest. Future studies should investigate the utility of flail chest management algorithms in patients with bicortically displaced fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiological study, level III.

Ventilator-associated events, not ventilator-associated pneumonia, is associated with higher mortality in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated events (VAE), using objective diagnostic criteria, are the preferred quality indicator for patients requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) for greater than 48 hours. We aim to identify the occurrence of VAE in our trauma population, the impact on survival, and length of stay, as compared to the traditional definition of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). METHODS: This retrospective review included adult trauma patients, who were Washington residents, admitted between 2012 and 2017, and required at least 3 days of MV. Exclusions included patients with Abbreviated Injury Scale head score greater than 4 and burn related mechanisms of injury. We matched trauma registry data with our institutional, physician-adjudicated, and culture-confirmed ventilator event database. We compared the clinical outcomes of ventilator-free days, intensive care unit length of stay, hospital length of stay, and likelihood of death between VAE and VAP. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred thirty-three trauma patients met criteria; 124 (8.1%) patients developed VAE, 114 (7.4%) patients developed VAP, and 63 (4.1%) patients met criteria for both VAE and VAP. After adjusted analyses, patients with VAE were more likely to die (hazard ratio [HR], 2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44-5.68), than those with VAP, as well those patients with neither diagnosis (HR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.83-4.38). Patients with VAP were no more likely to die (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.91-2.68) than those with neither diagnosis. Patients with VAE had fewer ventilator-free days than those with VAP (HR, -2.71; 95% CI, -4.74 to -0.68). CONCLUSION: Critically injured trauma patients who develop VAE are three times more likely to die and utilize almost 3 days more MV than those that develop VAP. The objective criteria of VAE make it a promising indicator on which quality indicator efforts should be focused. Future studies should be aimed at identification of modifiable risk factors for VAE and their impact on outcome, as these patients are at high risk for death. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort study, level III.

Rib Fracture Fixation: Indications and Outcomes.

Rib fractures are a frequently identified injury in the trauma population. Not only are multiple rib fractures painful, but they are associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes. Pneumonia in particular can be devastating, especially to an elderly patient, but other complications such as prolonged ventilation and increased intensive care and hospital durations of stay have a negative impact on the patient. Computed tomography scan is the best modality to diagnosis rib fractures but the treatment of fractures is still evolving. Currently patient care involves a multidisciplinary approach that includes pain control, aggressive pulmonary therapy, and possibly surgical fixation.

Interval Appendectomy: Finding the Breaking Point for Cost-Effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Patients with phlegmonous appendicitis can be managed nonoperatively, yet debate continues about the need for interval appendectomy (IA), given the low risk of recurrence or neoplasm. We sought to determine for which patient age interval appendectomy is cost-effective. METHODS: Using TreeAge software, a cost-effectiveness model was developed. Two strategies were compared, IA and no interval appendectomy (NIA). Interval appendectomy patients were modeled with probability of benign pathology, cancer or inflammatory bowel disease, and possible operative complications. Patients with NIA were modeled with the probability of recurrence. The probability of malignancy or inflammatory bowel disease developing, or death occurring during a lifetime, was modeled. Base case scenarios at 18, 35, and 50 years old were completed using a Monte Carlo microsimulation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was completed using 2-dimensional sample as a Monte Carlo microsimulation to account for variability for patients 18 to 60 years old. Probabilities of complications developing, pathologic diagnosis requiring additional management, and state utility were extracted from published data. Costs were collected from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and utility was quality-adjusted life years (QALY). RESULTS: For an 18-year-old patient, IA costs $9,417.22 with a gain of 16.59 QALYs compared with NIA, which costs $11,613.57 with a gain of 16.52 QALYs. For a 35-year-old, IA costs $8,989.16 with 9.1 QALYs gained. No interval appendectomy costs $6,614.61 and 9.09 QALYs gained. For the 35-year-old patient, the interval cost-effectiveness ratio comparing NIA with IA is $237,455/QALY. As patient age increases, the interval cost-effectiveness ratio increases. Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, IA remains cost-effective until the patient is 33 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Interval appendectomy should be considered in patients younger than 34 years of age.

Tailoring the operative approach for appendicitis to the patient: a prediction model from national surgical quality improvement program data.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is increasingly being performed in the United States, despite controversy about differences in infectious complication rates compared with open appendectomy (OA). Subpopulations exist in which infectious complication rates, both surgical site and organ space, differ with respect to LA compared with OA. STUDY DESIGN: All appendectomies in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were analyzed with respect to surgical site infection (SSI) and organ space infection (OSI). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified independent predictors of SSI or OSI. Probabilities of SSI or OSI were determined for subpopulations to identify when LA was superior to OA. RESULTS: From 2005 to 2009, there were 61,830 appendectomies performed (77.5% LA), of which 9,998 (16.2%) were complicated (58.7% LA). The risk of SSI was considerably lower for LA in both noncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. Across all ages, body mass index, renal function, and WBCs, LA was associated with a lower probability of SSI. The risk of OSI was considerably greater for LA in both noncomplicated and complicated appendicitis. In complicated appendicitis, OA was associated with a lower probability of OSI in patients with WBC >12 cells × 10(3)/µL. In noncomplicated appendicitis, OA was associated with a lower probability of OSI in patients with a body mass index <37.5 when compared with LA. CONCLUSIONS: Subpopulations exist in which OA is superior to LA in terms of OSI, however, SSI is consistently lower in LA patients.

Do Women Understand Urogynecologic Terminology?

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to describe women's stated knowledge of the primary urogynecologic diagnostic terms (urinary incontinence, pelvic floor disorder, and pelvic organ prolapse) and to assess factors associated with knowledge. METHODS: Before any education about pelvic floor disorders, 376 women presenting to primary care-level gynecologic clinics were asked whether they knew what the terms urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and pelvic floor disorder meant. χ(2) and t tests were used to compare characteristics of women with complete knowledge versus partial or no knowledge of terms. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Of all women, 25% knew all 3 terms and 18% knew none. Moreover, 80%, 52%, and 27% of women reported that they knew the meaning of the terms urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and pelvic floor disorder, respectively. Of women with stress urinary incontinence symptoms, 88% knew the term urinary incontinence compared with 78% without stress urinary incontinence (P = 0.07). Of 41 women, 31 (76%) with the symptom of vaginal bulge knew the term pelvic organ prolapse compared with 49% without (P = 0.001). Only higher education and symptom of vaginal bulge were associated with complete knowledge of the 3 terms; 30% of women who completed college or higher reported complete knowledge compared with 18% who did not (P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Public health campaigns using terms pelvic organ prolapse or pelvic floor disorders are unlikely to reach most women. Further education and research are needed to improve women's health literacy in urogynecology.