Mortality burden from variation in provision of surgical care in emergency general surgery: a cohort study using the National Inpatient Sample.

ABSTRACT

Background: The decision to undertake a surgical intervention for an emergency general surgery (EGS) condition (appendicitis, diverticulitis, cholecystitis, hernia, peptic ulcer, bowel obstruction, ischemic bowel) involves a complex consideration of factors, particularly in older adults. We hypothesized that identifying variability in the application of operative management could highlight a potential pathway to improve patient survival and outcomes. Methods: We included adults aged 65+ years with an EGS condition from the 2016-2017 National Inpatient Sample. Operative management was determined from procedure codes. Each patient was assigned a propensity score (PS) for the likelihood of undergoing an operation, modeled from patient and hospital factors EGS diagnosis, age, gender, race, presence of shock, comorbidities, and hospital EGS volumes. Low and high probability for surgery was defined using a PS cut-off of 0.5. We identified two model-concordant groups (no surgery-low probability, surgery-high probability) and two model-discordant groups (no surgery-high probability, surgery-low probability). Logistic regression estimated the adjusted OR (AOR) of in-hospital mortality for each group. Results: Of 375 546 admissions, 21.2% underwent surgery. Model-discordant care occurred in 14.6%; 5.9% had no surgery despite a high PS and 8.7% received surgery with low PS. In the adjusted regression, model-discordant care was associated with significantly increased mortality no surgery-high probability AOR 2.06 (1.86 to 2.27), surgery-low probability AOR 1.57 (1.49 to 1.65). Model-concordant care showed a protective effect against mortality (AOR 0.83, 0.74 to 0.92). Conclusions: Nearly one in seven EGS patients received model-discordant care, which was associated with higher mortality. Our study suggests that streamlined treatment protocols can be applied in EGS patients as a means to save lives. Level of evidence III.