Association of Race, Ethnicity, Language, and Insurance with Time to Treatment Initiation Among Women with Breast Cancer at an Urban, Academic, Safety-Net Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Initial treatment for nonmetastatic breast cancer is resection or neoadjuvant systemic therapy, depending on tumor biology and patient factors. Delays in treatment have been shown to impact survival and quality of life. Little has been published on the performance of safety-net hospitals in delivering timely care for all patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, diagnosed and treated between 2009 and 2019 at an academic, safety-net hospital. Time to treatment initiation was calculated for all patients. Consistent with a recently published Committee on Cancer timeliness metric, a treatment delay was defined as time from tissue diagnosis to treatment of greater than 60 days. RESULTS: A total of 799 eligible women with stage 1-3 breast cancer met study criteria. Median age was 60 years, 55.7% were non-white, 35.5% were non-English-speaking, 18.9% were Hispanic, and 49.4% were Medicaid/uninsured. Median time to treatment was 41 days (IQR 27-56 days), while 81.1% of patients initiated treatment within 60 days. The frequency of treatment delays did not vary by race, ethnicity, insurance, or language. Diagnosis year was inversely associated with the occurrence of a treatment delay (OR: 0.944, 95% CI 0.893-0.997, p value: 0.039). CONCLUSION: At our institution, race, ethnicity, insurance, and language were not associated with treatment delay. Additional research is needed to determine how our safety-net hospital delivered timely care to all patients with breast cancer, as reducing delays in care may be one mechanism by which health systems can mitigate disparities in the treatment of breast cancer.

Transitioning from the Emergency Department to a General Internist Outpatient Clinic for Paracentesis: A Qualitative Inquiry.

BACKGROUND: Repeated paracentesis for ascites can place significant demands on the emergency department (ED). A new general internist-led outpatient procedure clinic to alleviate this demand required ED staff and patients to accept this transition of care. AIM: This qualitative study evaluates barriers and facilitators to implementing the FLuid ASPiration (FLASP) clinic in a safety net hospital. METHODS: The FLASP clinic opened during the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2021. From February to April 2022, semi-structured interviews were conducted with: 10 ED physicians and nurses; 5 FLASP clinic patients; and 4 patients receiving paracentesis in the ED. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a Grounded Theory approach for themes categorized by Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) domains including: attitudes/knowledge; social norms; and logistics. RESULTS: Thematic analysis found that ED staff appreciated reduced demand for paracentesis, but barriers included: lack of knowledge; concerns about unstable patients and patient expectations (norms); and scheduling logistics. FLASP clinic patients had only favorable themes: belief in clinic safety; positive relationship with staff; and clinic efficiency. Patients using the ED for paracentesis expressed only concerns: possible need for testing or hospitalization; care usually in the ED; and unclear clinic scheduling. CONCLUSION: This study reveals challenges to transitioning sites of care for paracentesis including the need for greater ED staff education and standardizing methods to triage patients to appropriate site of care. Greater support and education of ED patients about the benefits of an outpatient procedure clinic may also reduce ED burden for paracentesis.

Mitigating disparities in breast cancer treatment at an academic safety-net hospital.

PURPOSE: Among women with non-metastatic breast cancer, marked disparities in stage at presentation, receipt of guideline-concordant treatment and stage-specific survival have been shown in national cohorts based on race, ethnicity, insurance and language. Little is published on the performance of safety-net hospitals to achieve equitable care. We evaluate differences in treatment and survival by race, ethnicity, language and insurance status among women with non-metastatic invasive breast cancer at a single, urban academic safety-net hospital. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, diagnosed and treated between 2009 and 2014 at an urban, academic safety-net hospital. Demographic, tumor and treatment characteristics were obtained. Stage at presentation, stage-specific overall survival, and receipt of guideline-concordant surgical and adjuvant therapies were analyzed. Chi-square analysis and ANOVA were used for statistical analysis. Unadjusted survival analysis was conducted by Kaplan-Meier method using log-rank test; adjusted 5 year survival analysis was completed stratified by early and late stage, using flexible parametric survival models incorporating age, race, primary language and insurance status. RESULTS: 520 women with stage 1-3 invasive breast cancer were identified. Median age was 58.5 years, 56.1% were non-white, 31.7% were non-English-speaking, 16.4% were Hispanic, and 50.1% were Medicaid/uninsured patients. There were no statistically significant differences in stage at presentation between age group, race, ethnicity, language or insurance. The rate of breast conserving surgery (BCS) among stage 1-2 patients did not vary by race, insurance or language. Among patients indicated for adjuvant therapies, the rates of recommendation and completion of therapy did not vary by race, ethnicity, insurance or language. Unadjusted survival at 5 years was 93.7% for stage 1-2 and 73.5% for stage 3. Adjusting for age, race, insurance status and primary language, overall survival at 5 years was 93.8% (95% CI 86.3-97.2%) for stage 1-2 and 83.4% (95% CI 35.5-96.9%) for stage 3 disease. Independently, for patients with early- and late-stage disease, age, race, language and insurance were not associated with survival at 5-years. CONCLUSION: Among patients diagnosed and treated at an academic safety-net hospital, there were no differences in the stage at presentation or receipt of guideline-concordant treatment by race, ethnicity, insurance or language. Overall survival did not vary by race, insurance or language. Additional research is needed to assess how hospitals and healthcare systems mitigate breast cancer disparities.

Association of Race, Ethnicity, Insurance, and Language and Rate of Breast-Conserving Therapy Among Women With Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer at an Urban, Safety-Net Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Breast-conserving therapy (BCT), specifically breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and adjuvant radiation, provides an equivalent alternative to mastectomy for eligible patients. However, previous studies have shown that BCT is underused in the United States, particularly among marginalized demographic groups. In this study, we examine the association between race, ethnicity, insurance, and language and rate of BCS among patients treated at an academic, safety-net hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 520 women with nonmetastatic breast cancer diagnosed and treated at an academic, safety-net hospital (2009-2014). We assessed eligibility for BCT and then differences in the rate of BCT among eligible patients by race, ethnicity, insurance, and language. Reasons for not undergoing BCT were documented. RESULTS: Median age was 60 y; 55.9% were non-White, 31.9% were non-English-speaking, 15.6% were Hispanic, and 47.4% were Medicaid/uninsured. Three hundred seventy one (86.3%) underwent BCS; within this group, 324 (87.3%) completed adjuvant radiation. Among patients undergoing mastectomy, 30 patients (36.7%) were eligible for BCT; within this group, reasons for mastectomy included patient preference (n = 28) and to avoid possible re-excision or adjuvant radiation in patients with significant comorbidities (n = 2). Eligibility for BCT varied by ethnicity (Hispanic [100%], Non-Hispanic [92%], P = 0.02), but not race, language, or insurance. Among eligible patients, rate of BCS varied by age (<50 y [84.9%], ≥50 y [92.9%], P = 0.01) and ethnicity (Hispanic [98.5%], Non-Hispanic [91.3%], P = 0.04), but not race, language, or insurance. CONCLUSIONS: At our safety-net hospital, the rate of BCS among eligible patients did not vary by race, language, or insurance. Excluding two highly comorbid patients, all patients who underwent mastectomy despite being eligible for BCT were counseled regarding BCS and expressed a preference for mastectomy. Further research is needed to understand the value of BCT in the treatment of breast cancer, to ensure informed decision-making, address potential misconceptions regarding BCT, and advance equitable care for all patients.

Safety and Feasibility of Performing Antireflux Procedures at a Safety Net Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: One-half of Americans have limited access to health care; these patients often receive care through safety net hospitals, which are associated with worse medical outcomes. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients who received foregut surgery at a safety net hospital to those at a private or university hospital. We hypothesized that patients treated at the safety net hospital will have a greater rate of radiographic recurrence and reoperations. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients who underwent hiatal hernia repair or fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease at an affiliated safety net, private, or university hospital from June 2015 to May 2020. The primary outcome was radiographic recurrence. The secondary outcomes included reoperation and symptom recurrence. Analysis was performed using analysis of variance, chi-square, and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 499 patients were identified: 157 at a safety net hospital, 233 at a private hospital, and 119 at a university hospital. The median (interquartile range) follow-up was 16 (13) mo. The safety net hospital treated more Hispanics, females, and patients with comorbidities. Large hiatal hernias were more common at the safety net and private hospitals. Robotic surgery was more frequently at the university hospital. There was no difference in radiographic recurrence (13.4% versus 19.7% versus 17.6%; P = 0.269), reoperation (3.8% versus 7.2% versus 6.7%; P = 0.389), or postoperative dysphagia (15.3% versus 12.6% versus 15.1%; P = 0.696). On logistic regression, there were no differences in outcomes among institutions. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that despite the challenges faced at safety net hospitals, it could be feasible to safely perform minimally invasive foregut surgery with similar outcomes to private and university hospitals.

Timeliness of Multimodal Care for At-Risk Breast Cancer Patients at a Safety Net Institution.

INTRODUCTION: Because limited data exist, we sought to evaluate timeliness of multimodal treatments in a safety net breast cancer population. METHODS: Breast cancer patients treated at a safety net hospital from 2016 to 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Time intervals were defined as primary time (PT) from diagnosis to initiation of primary intervention, secondary time (ST) from completion of primary to initiation of secondary intervention, and tertiary time (TT) from completion of secondary to initiation of tertiary intervention. Variables included primary language, insurance type, and race. RESULTS: Of 223 patients, 99 (44.4%) primarily spoke Spanish, 29 (13.0%) were of Black race, and 184 (82.5%) had Medicaid or uninsured status. Median (IQR) age at diagnosis was 55 (48-62) years. Primary intervention was surgical in 127/216 (58.8%); secondary intervention was systemic in 38/169 (22.5%); and tertiary intervention was radiation in 67/80 (83.8%). Overall, median days (IQR) for PT were 69 (53, 98), ST were 65 (42, 95), and TT were 69 (43, 88). PT was significantly longer in Black [105 (76, 142) days] patients compared to non-Hispanic White patients [68 (51, 107) days, P = 0.031)] and White Hispanic patients [65 (53,91) days, P = 0.014]. There were no significant differences in PT, ST, or TT by spoken language or insurance type. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients remain at risk due to prolonged time to intervention. Spanish-speaking status was not associated with inferior timeliness or completion of multimodal care at a safety net hospital. Identifying safety net hospital barriers to achieving benchmarks for timely completion of all phases of multimodal care warrants further attention.

Shift in Prehospital Mode of Transportation for Trauma Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we experienced alterations to modes of transportation among trauma patients suffering penetrating injuries. Historically, a small percentage of our penetrating trauma patients use private means of prehospital transportation. Our hypothesis was that the use of private transportation among trauma patients increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and was associated with better outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all adult trauma patients (January 1, 2017 to March 19, 2021), using the date of the shelter-in-place ordinance (March 19, 2020) to separate trauma patients into prepandemic and pandemic patient groups. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, mode of prehospital transportation, and variables such as initial Injury Severity Score, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilator days, and mortality were recorded. RESULTS: We identified 11,919 adult trauma patients, 9017 (75.7%) in the prepandemic group and 2902 (24.3%) in the pandemic group. The number of patients using private prehospital transportation also increased (from 2.4% to 6.7%, P < 0.001). Between the prepandemic and pandemic private transportation cohorts, there were reductions in mean Injury Severity Score (from 8.1 ± 10.4 to 5.3 ± 6.6: P = 0.02), ICU admission rates (from 15% to 2.4%: P < 0.001), and hospital length of stay (from 4.0 ± 5.3 to 2.3 ± 1.9: P = 0.02). However, there was no difference in mortality (4.1% and 2.0%, P = 0.221). CONCLUSIONS: We found that there was a significant shift in prehospital transportation among trauma patients toward private transportation after the shelter-in-place order. However, this did not coincide with a change in mortality despite a downward trend. This phenomenon could help direct future policy and protocols in trauma systems when battling major public health emergencies.

Sustaining PrEP Prescriptions at a Safety-Net Hospital in New York City During COVID-19: Lessons Learned.

To understand the impact of COVID-19-related disruptions on PrEP services, we reviewed PrEP prescriptions at NYC Health + Hospitals/Bellevue from July 2019 through July 2021. PrEP prescriptions were examined as PrEP person-equivalents (PrEP PE) in order to account for the variable time of refill duration (i.e., 1-3 months). To assess "PrEP coverage", we calculated PrEP medication possession ratios (MPR) while patients were under study observation. Pre-clinic closure, mean PrEP PE = 244.2 (IQR 189.2, 287.5; median = 252.5) were observed. Across levels of clinic closures, mean PrEP PE = 247.3, (IQR 215.5, 265.4; median = 219.9) during 100% clinic closure, 255.4 (IQR 224, 284.3; median = 249.0) during 80% closure, and 274.6 (IQR 273.0, 281.0; median = 277.2) during 50% closure were observed. Among patients continuously prescribed PrEP pre-COVID-19, the mean MPR mean declined from 83% (IQR 72-100%; median = 100%) to 63% (IQR 35-97%; median = 66%) after the onset of COVID-19. For patients newly initiated on PrEP after the onset of COVID-19, the mean MPR was 73% (IQR 41-100%; median = 100%). Our ability to sustain PrEP provisions, as measured by both PrEP PE and MPR, can likely be attributed to our pre-COVID-19 system for PrEP delivery, which emphasizes navigation, same-day initiation, and primary care integration. In the era of COVID-19 as well as future unforeseen healthcare disruptions, PrEP programs must be robust and flexible in order to sustain PrEP delivery.

Evaluating the Performance of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) in a Trauma-Exposed, Socioeconomically Vulnerable Patient Population.

The properties and utility of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) remain unstudied in community-based populations. This study evaluates the performance of the PC-PTSD-5 to determine whether it can be used as a brief alternative to the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in a large public hospital in the southeastern United States. Participants (N = 422; 92.7% Black; 85.8% female; Mage = 42.0 years, SDage = 13.4 years) completed the PCL-5 and PC-PTSD-5 after recruitment from medical clinic waiting rooms and admission lists. Using chance-corrected test quality indices and item response theory (IRT) analyses, we determined optimal cut-scores for screening and examined item performance. Approximately 45.0% of the sample screened positive for probable DSM-5 PTSD using the PCL-5. The PC-PTSD-5 demonstrated high internal consistency and strong associations with PCL-5 scores (total, r = .79; items, rs = .51-.61). A cut-score of one was optimally sensitive for screening (κ[1] = .96), and a cut-score of four had the highest quality of probable efficiency (κ[.5] = .66) for detecting self-reported DSM-5 PTSD on the PCL-5. IRT analyses indicated Item 1 (nightmares, intrusive memories) provided the most information, and other items may not be incrementally useful for this sample. Findings provide preliminary support for the use of the PC-PTSD-5 as a brief alternative to the PCL-5 among chronically trauma-exposed patients in the public healthcare setting.

Hospitalization as an opportunity to engage underserved individuals in shared decision-making for lung cancer screening: results from two randomized pilot trials.

PURPOSE: Medicare requires tobacco dependence counseling and shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening (LCS) reimbursement. We hypothesized that initiating SDM during inpatient tobacco treatment visits would increase LCS among patients with barriers to proactively seeking outpatient preventive care. METHODS: We collected baseline assessments and performed two pilot randomized trials at our safety-net hospital. Pilot 1 tested feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a nurse practitioner initiating SDM for LCS during hospitalization (Inpatient SDM). We collected qualitative data on barriers encountered during Pilot 1. Pilot 2 added a community health worker (CHW) to address barriers to LCS completion (Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation). For both studies, preliminary efficacy was an intention-to-treat analysis of LCS completion at 3 months between intervention and comparator (furnishing of LCS decision aid only) groups. RESULTS: Baseline assessments showed that patients preferred in-person LCS discussions versus self-reviewing materials; overall 20% had difficulty understanding written information. In Pilot 1, 4% (2/52) in Inpatient SDM versus 2% (1/48, comparator) completed LCS (p = 0.6), despite 89% (89/100) desiring LCS. Primary care providers noted that competing priorities and patient factors (e.g., social barriers to keeping appointments) prevented the intervention from working as intended. In Pilot 2, 50% (5/10) in Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation versus 9% (1/11, comparator) completed LCS (p < 0.05). Many patients were ineligible due to recent diagnostic chest CT (Pilot 1: 255/659; Pilot 2: 239/527). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation shows promise to improve LCS rates among underserved patients who smoke, but feasibility is limited by recent diagnostic chest CT among inpatients. Implementing CHW-navigation in other clinical settings may facilitate LCS for underserved patients. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03276806 (8 September 2017); NCT03793894 (4 January 2019).

High Compliance With Choosing Wisely Breast Surgical Guidelines at a Safety-Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Professional organizations recently set guidelines for avoiding surgeries of low utility and overutilization for the Choosing Wisely campaign. These include re-excision for invasive cancer close to margins, double mastectomy in patients with unilateral breast cancer, axillary lymph node dissection in patients with limited nodal disease, and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients ≥70 years with early-stage breast cancer. Variable adherence to these recommendations led us to evaluate implementation rates of low-value surgical guidelines at a safety-net hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed breast cancer patients who underwent surgery from 2015 to 2020. Each patient was assessed for eligibility for omission of the listed surgeries. Trends were evaluated by cohorts before and after a fellowship-trained breast surgeon joined the faculty in 2018. Outcomes were compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Among 195 patients, none underwent re-excision for close margins of invasive cancer. Only 6.7% of patients (3/45) received contralateral mastectomy and 1.8% of eligible patients (3/169) received axillary lymph node dissection. Overall, 60% of patients ≥ 70 years with stage 1 hormone-positive breast cancer (9/15) received SLNB. There was a downward trend from 71% of eligible patients receiving SLNB in 2015-2018 to 50% in 2019-2020. CONCLUSIONS: De-implementation of traditional surgical practices, deemed as low-value care, toward newer guidelines is achievable even at community hospitals serving a low socioeconomic community. By avoiding overtreatment, hospitals can achieve effective resource allocation which allow for social distributive justice among patients with breast cancer and ensure strategic use of scarce health economic resources while preserving patient outcomes.

Spanish-Speaking Status: A Protective Factor in Colorectal Cancer Presentation at a Safety-Net Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Lower screening rates and poorer outcomes for colorectal cancer have been associated with Hispanic ethnicity and Spanish-speaking status, respectively. METHODS: We reviewed sequential colorectal cancer patients evaluated by the surgical service at a safety-net hospital (SNH) (2016-2019). Insurance type, stage, cancer type, surgery class (elective/urgent), initial surgeon contact setting (outpatient clinic/inpatient consult), operation (resection/diversion), and follow-up were compared by patient-reported primary spoken language. RESULTS: Of 157 patients, 85 (54.1%) were men, 91 (58.0%) had colon cancer, 67 (42.7%) primarily spoke Spanish, and late stage (III or IV) presentations occurred in 83 (52.9%) patients. The median age was 58 y, cancer resection was completed in 48 (30.6%) patients, and 51 (32.5%) patients were initially seen as inpatient consults. On univariate analysis, Spanish-speaking status was significantly associated with female sex, Medicaid insurance, being seen as an outpatient consult, and undergoing elective and resection surgery. On multivariable logistic regression, Spanish-speaking patients had higher odds of having Medicaid insurance (AOR 2.28, P = 0.019), receiving a resection (AOR 3.96, P = 0.006), and undergoing an elective surgery (AOR 3.24, P = 0.025). Spanish-speaking patients also had lower odds of undergoing an initial inpatient consult (AOR 0.34, P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Spanish-speaking status was associated with a lower likelihood of emergent presentation and need for palliative surgery among SNH colorectal cancer patients. Further research is needed to determine if culturally competent infrastructure in the SNH setting translates into Spanish-speaking status as a potentially protective factor.

Diagnostic laparoscopy is underutilized in the staging of gastric adenocarcinoma regardless of hospital type: An US safety net collaborative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) is a key component of staging for locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma (GA). We hypothesized that utilization of DL varied between safety net (SNH) and affiliated tertiary referral centers (TRCs). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with primary GA eligible for DL were identified from the US Safety Net Collaborative database (2012-2014). Clinicopathologic factors were analyzed for association with use of DL and findings on DL. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 233 eligible patients, 69 (30%) received DL, of which 24 (35%) were positive for metastatic disease. Forty percent of eligible SNH patients underwent DL compared to 21.5% at TRCs. Lack of insurance was significantly associated with decreased use of DL (OR 0.48, p < 0.01), while African American (OR 6.87, p = 0.02) and Asian race (OR 3.12, p ≤ 0.01), signet ring cells on biopsy (OR 3.14, p < 0.01), and distal tumors (OR 1.62, p < 0.01) were associated with increased use. Median OS of patients with a negative DL was better than those without DL or a positive DL (not reached vs. 32 vs. 12 months, p < 0.005, Figure 1). CONCLUSIONS: Results from DL are a strong predictor of OS in GA; however, the procedure is underutilized. Patients from racial minority groups were more likely to undergo DL, which likely accounts for higher DL rates among SNH patients.

Ambulance diversion and ED destination by race/ethnicity: evaluation of Massachusetts' ambulance diversion ban.

BACKGROUND: The impact of ambulance diversion on potentially diverted patients, particularly racial/ethnic minority patients, is largely unknown. Treating Massachusetts' 2009 ambulance diversion ban as a natural experiment, we examined if the ban was associated with increased concordance in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) patients of different race/ethnicity being transported to the same emergency department (ED). METHODS: We obtained Medicare Fee for Service claims records (2007-2012) for enrollees aged 66 and older. We stratified the country into patient zip codes and identified zip codes with sizable (non-Hispanic) White, (non-Hispanic) Black and Hispanic enrollees. For a stratified random sample of enrollees from all diverse zip codes in Massachusetts and 18 selected comparison states, we identified EMS transports to an ED. In each zip code, we identified the most frequent ED destination of White EMS-transported patients ("reference ED"). Our main outcome was a dichotomous indicator of patient EMS transport to the reference ED, and secondary outcome was transport to an ED serving lower-income patients ("safety-net ED"). Using a difference-in-differences regression specification, we contrasted the pre- to post-ban changes in each outcome in Massachusetts with the corresponding change in the comparison states. RESULTS: Our study cohort of 744,791 enrollees from 3331 zip codes experienced 361,006 EMS transports. At baseline, the proportion transported to the reference ED was higher among White patients in Massachusetts and comparison states (67.2 and 60.9%) than among Black (43.6 and 46.2%) and Hispanic (62.5 and 52.7%) patients. Massachusetts ambulance diversion ban was associated with a decreased proportion transported to the reference ED among White (- 2.7 percentage point; 95% CI, - 4.5 to - 1.0) and Black (- 4.1 percentage point; 95% CI, - 6.2 to - 1.9) patients and no change among Hispanic patients. The ban was associated with an increase in likelihood of transport to a safety-net ED among Hispanic patients (3.0 percentage points, 95% CI, 0.3 to 5.7) and a decreased likelihood among White patients (1.2 percentage points, 95% CI, - 2.3 to - 0.2). CONCLUSION: Massachusetts ambulance diversion ban was associated with a reduction in the proportion of White and Black EMS patients being transported to the most frequent ED destination for White patients, highlighting the role of non-proximity factors in EMS transport destination.

Oral cancer patients achieve comparable survival at high safety-net burden hospitals.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of hospital safety-net burden and social demographics on the overall survival of patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 48,176 oral cancer patients diagnosed between the years 2004 to 2015 from the National Cancer Database and categorized treatment facilities as no, low, or high safety-net burden hospitals based on the percentage of uninsured or Medicaid patients treated. Using the Kaplan Meier method and multivariate analysis, we examined the effect of hospital safety-net burden, sociodemographic variables, and clinical factors on overall survival. RESULTS: Of the 1269 treatment facilities assessed, the median percentage of uninsured/Medicaid patients treated was 0% at no, 11.6% at low, and 23.5% at high safety-net burden hospitals and median survival was 68.6, 74.8, and 55.0 months, respectively (p < 0.0001). High safety-net burden hospitals treated more non-white populations (15.4%), lower median household income (<$30,000) (23.2%), and advanced stage cancers (AJCC III/IV) (54.6%). Patients treated at low (aHR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.91-1.04, p = 0.405) and high (aHR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.98-1.13, p = 0.175) safety-net burden hospitals did not experience worse survival outcomes compared to patients treated at no safety-net burden hospitals. CONCLUSION: High safety-net burden hospitals treated more oral cancer patients of lower socioeconomic status and advanced disease. Multivariate analysis showed high safety-net burden hospitals achieved comparable patient survival to lower burden hospitals.

Hospital Location and Socioeconomic Disadvantage of Emergency General Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: Emergency general surgery (EGS) patients are more socioeconomically vulnerable than elective counterparts. We hypothesized that a hospital's neighborhood disadvantage is associated with vulnerability of its EGS patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Area deprivation index (ADI), a neighborhood-level measure of disadvantage, and key characteristics of 724 hospitals in 14 states were linked to patient-level data in State Inpatient Databases. Hospital and EGS patient characteristics were compared across hospital ADI quartiles (least disadvantaged [ADI 1-25] "affluent," minimally disadvantaged [ADI 26-50] "min-da", moderately disadvantaged [ADI 51-75] "mod-da", and most disadvantaged [ADI 76-100] "impoverished") using chi2 tests and multivariable regression. RESULTS: Higher disadvantage hospitals are more often nonteaching (affluent = 38.9%, min-da = 53.5%, mod-da = 72.1%, and impoverished = 67.6%), nonaffiliated with medical schools (50%, 72.4%, 81.8%, and 78.8%), and in rural areas (3.3%, 9.2%, 31.2%, and 27.9%). EGS patients at higher disadvantage hospitals are more likely to be older (43.9%, 48.6%, 49.1%, and 46.6%), have >3 comorbidities (17.0%, 19.0%, 18.4%, and 19.3%), live in low-income areas (21.4%, 23.6%, 32.2%, and 42.5%), and experience complications (23.2%, 23.7%, 24.0%, and 25.2%). Rates of uninsurance/underinsurance were highest at affluent and impoverished hospitals (18.0, 16.4%, 17.7%, and 19.2%). Higher disadvantage hospitals serve fewer minorities (32.6%, 21.3%, 20.7%, and 24.0%), except in rural areas (2.9%, 6.7%, 6.5%, and 15.5%). In multivariable analyses, the impoverished hospital ADI quartile did not predict odds of serving as a safety-net or predominantly minority-serving hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals in impoverished areas disproportionately serve underserved EGS patient populations but are less likely to have robust resources for EGS care or train future EGS surgeons. These findings have implications for measures to improve equity in EGS outcomes.

Surgical resection of early stage hepatocellular carcinoma improves patient survival at safety net hospitals.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Surgical resection is indicated for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with Child A cirrhosis. We hypothesize that surgical intervention and survival are limited by advanced HCC presentation at safety net hospitals (SNHs) versus academic medical centers (AMCs). METHODS: Patients with HCC and Child A cirrhosis in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012-2014) were evaluated. Demographics, clinicopathologic features, operative characteristics, and outcomes were compared between SNHs and AMCs. Liver transplantation was excluded. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the effect of surgery on overall (OS). RESULTS: A total of 689 Child A patients with HCC were identified. SNH patients frequently presented with T3/T4 stage (35% vs. 24%) and metastases (17% vs. 8%; p < .05). SNH patients were as likely to undergo surgery as AMC patients (17% vs. 18%); however, SNH patients were younger (56 vs. 64 years), underwent minor hepatectomy (65% vs. 38%), and frequently harbored well-differentiated tumors (23% vs. 2%; p < .05). On multivariate analysis, surgical resection and stage, but not hospital type, were associated with improved OS. CONCLUSIONS: Although SNH patients present with advanced HCC, survival outcomes for early stage HCC are similar at SNHs and AMCs. Identifying barriers to early diagnosis at SNH may increase surgical candidacy and improve outcomes.

Implementation and Impact of a Store-and-Forward Teledermatology Platform in an Urban Academic Safety-Net Health Care System.

Background:Minority and low-income patients disproportionately experience dermatologic access challenges. Store-and-forward (SAF) teledermatology has emerged as a model of care delivery that may improve access. We sought to evaluate patterns of utilization and overall impact after SAF teledermatology implementation in a safety-net health care system. Methods:We performed a retrospective review of 3,285 teledermatology consultations from 2014 to 2017 in an urban academic safety-net health care system. Results:A total of 1,680 (51.2%) patients were referred for inflammatory/rash conditions and 967 (29.5%) for skin lesions. The teledermatologist recommended in-person evaluation in 1,199 encounters (36.5%). Median wait time for a subsequent appointment was 36 days (range 0-244 days). Of subsequent in-clinic visits, 237 patients (26.4%) underwent skin biopsy. No-show rate after referral was 11.8%. In comparison, median wait time for dermatology appointment through standard referral was 64 days, with a no-show rate of 18.6%. Biopsy rate of patients referred via teledermatology was 26.4%, in comparison to a rate of 10.9% of patients referred directly from primary care provider. Discussion:Implementation of SAF teledermatology in a safety-net health system resulted in avoidance of 63.5% potential dermatology visits. Consultation typically resulted in a change in suspected diagnosis or management plan. Rates of concordance between teledermatology consults and in-person evaluations were high. Median wait time was reduced by almost half, no-show rate was reduced ∼37%, and biopsy rate was more than double for teledermatology patients compared with standard referral. Conclusion:These findings suggest that SAF teledermatology may improve access to high-quality dermatologic care and increase clinic efficiencies for patients in safety-net health care systems.

Successful Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program in a Safety-Net Hospital: Barriers and Facilitators.

PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs comprise bundles of evidence-based recommendations designed to reduce physiological stress and support early return of function after surgery. In this study, we sought to investigate the barriers and facilitators of successful implementation of ERAS in a major safety-net hospital. DESIGN: Our ERAS program has been designed as a quality improvement pilot project in prospective fashion with a real-time feedback loop. The program is designed to address established culture of safety-net hospitals. METHODS: An extensive multidisciplinary team investigated the barriers to success for three different levels of program stakeholders: providers, patients, and the facility. After a systematic review of these barriers, solutions were offered and implemented in a multidisciplinary care model with special attention to outcomes and continuous feedback. The findings are summarized in a grid format for better understanding and implementation ease. FINDINGS: Patients (N = 198) were enrolled in an ERAS program in a nonrandomized fashion during the pilot period of October 2017 to August 2018. ERAS cohort of patients' outcomes were then compared with those of 20,328 non-ERAS patients. The ERAS group had less complication with shorter length of stay compared with their non-ERAS counterparts. Furthermore, it has cost less to take care of these patients. Interestingly, this decrease was not achieved by a reciprocal increase in subsequent readmission or reoperation rates. CONCLUSIONS: Unique barriers exist when implementing an ERAS protocol in a safety-net hospital. These barriers can be overcome to improve the quality of care at a decreased cost. We have provided a grid to facilitate the implementation process.

Increased 30-day readmission rate after craniotomy for tumor resection at safety net hospitals in small metropolitan areas.

PURPOSE: Unplanned readmission of post-operative brain tumor patients is often attributed to hospital and patient characteristics and is associated with higher mortality and cost. Previous studies demonstrate multiple patient outcome disparities in safety net hospitals (SNHs) when compared to non-SNHs. This study uses the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) to determine if initial brain tumor resection at SNHs is associated with increased 30-day non-elective readmission rates. METHODS: Patients with benign or malignant primary or metastatic brain tumor undergoing craniotomy for surgical resection were retrospectively identified in the NRD from 2010 to 2014. SNHs were defined as hospitals with Medicaid and uninsured patient burden in the top quartile. Descriptive and multivariate analyses employing survey-adjusted logistic regression evaluated patient and hospital level factors influencing 30-day readmissions. RESULTS: During the study period, 83,367 patients met inclusion criteria. 44.7% of patients had a benign tumor, and 55.3% had a malignant tumor. Secondary CNS neoplasm (5.99%), post-operative infection (5.96%), and septicemia (4.26%) caused most readmissions within 30 days. Patients had increased unplanned readmission rates if they underwent craniotomy for tumor resection at a SNH in a small metropolitan area (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21, p = 0.01), but not at a SNH in a large metropolitan area (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93-1.05, p = 0.73). CONCLUSION: This finding may reflect differences in access to care and disparities in neurosurgical resources between small and large metropolitan areas. Inequities in expertise and capacity are relevant as surgical volume was also related to readmission rates. Further studies may be warranted to address such disparities.