Cost-effectiveness of a purpose-built ward environment and new allied health model of care for major trauma

Frailty across the adult age spectrum and its effects on outcomes: Experience from a level 1 trauma centre

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence suggests that frailty may be a more reliable measure than age to predict outcomes following trauma. Frailty leads to prolonged hospitalisation and increased burden on the hospital system in older patients. The aim of this study is to review the prevalence of frailty in our trauma patients and the association of frailty with hospital-based and twelve-month outcomes.

METHODS

Patient demographics, discharge destination, hospital length of stay (LOS), and functional status at 12 months were reviewed. Frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (score <4 non frail, 4 vulnerable, >4 frail). Factors associated with frailty and outcomes including discharge destination (home or inpatient care) and LOS (p value <0.2) were included in multivariate models.

RESULTS

There were 1230 patients admitted to the trauma ward between November 2020-August 2021 who had linked registry data. Of these, 217 (17.6 %) were deemed frail with 131 (10.7 %) being vulnerable. In the group over 65 years, 38.6 % were frail and 16.1 % were vulnerable. Accounting for confounding factors (including age), being frail was associated with discharge to further inpatient care (AOR 4.82 (3.02 - 7.68), p value <0.001). At 12 months post injury, the mortality rate of patients with frailty was 28 %, compared to 2 % for the rest of the population and patients reported significantly more problems with undertaking daily tasks such as mobility and self-care.

CONCLUSION

After adjusting for confounding factors, frailty is associated with nearly five times the increase in odds of a discharge to further inpatient care. Long term outcomes are also significantly poorer for patients with frailty. Identifying frailty on admission may help outcomes by targeting this patient group and optimising healthcare resource usage.

Evaluation of the Acceptability and Feasibility of Stress Mitigation Education and Support Delivered via Telehealth for People After Road Traffic Musculoskeletal/Orthopedic Injury

PURPOSE

To evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of a consumer co-designed telehealth intervention which aimed to reduce claimant distress by providing pain management strategies, informational and social support to people who had made a compensation claim following road traffic musculoskeletal injury.

METHODS

Eleven claimant participants who were at risk of a poor outcome completed the intervention in a one-on-one setting with the same clinician delivering the program across all sessions.They were interviewed about their experience (acceptability and feasibility including the use of telehealth). Clinicians who delivered the intervention also completed an anonymous feedback survey exploring their experiences delivering the intervention. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

There were four themes which broadly related to the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention as well as the perceived benefits: (1) knowledge is power, (2) healing with social connection, (3) further along than I would have been, and (4) telehealth was acceptable and feasible.

CONCLUSION

The delivery of a co-designed telehealth-delivered stress mitigation intervention to support people with a road traffic musculoskeletal injury was feasible to deliver and acceptable to people who were at risk of a poor outcome. Further research to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention on outcomes such as pain, self-efficacy, and claims costs are needed.

Potential for advances in data linkage and data science to support injury prevention research

The recent COVID-19 pandemic stimulated unprecedented linkage of datasets worldwide, and while injury is endemic rather than pandemic, there is much to be learned by the injury prevention community from the data science approaches taken to respond to the pandemic to support research into the primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of injuries. The use of routinely collected data to produce real-world evidence, as an alternative to clinical trials, has been gaining in popularity as the availability and quality of digital health platforms grow and the linkage landscape, and the analytics required to make best use of linked and unstructured data, is rapidly evolving. Capitalising on existing data sources, innovative linkage and advanced analytic approaches provides the opportunity to undertake novel injury prevention research and generate new knowledge, while avoiding data waste and additional burden to participants. We provide a tangible, but not exhaustive, list of examples showing the breadth and value of data linkage, along with the emerging capabilities of natural language processing techniques to enhance injury research. To optimise data science approaches to injury prevention, injury researchers in this area need to share methods, code, models and tools to improve consistence and efficiencies in this field. Increased collaboration between injury prevention researchers and data scientists working on population data linkage systems has much to offer this field of research.

Dollars and Sense: The Financial Argument for Dedicated Posttrauma Center Care

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate that the creation of a Center for Trauma Survivorship (CTS) is not cost-prohibitive but is a revenue generator for the institution.

BACKGROUND

A dedicated CTS has been demonstrated to increase adherence with follow-up visits and improve overall aftercare in severely injured patients discharged from the trauma center. A potential impediment to the creation of similar centers is its assumed prohibitive cost.

METHODS

This pre and post-cohort study examines the financial impact of patients treated by the CTS. Patients in the PRE cohort were those treated in the year before CTS inception. Eligibility criteria are trauma patients admitted who are ≥18 years of age and have a New Injury Severity Score ≥16 or intensive care unit stay ≥2 days. Financial data were obtained from the hospital's billing and cost accounting systems for a 1-year time period after discharge.

RESULTS

There were 176 patients in the PRE and 256 in the CTS cohort. The CTS cohort generated 1623 subsequent visits versus 748 in the PRE cohort. CTS patients underwent more follow-up surgery in their first year of recovery as compared with the PRE cohort (98 vs 26 procedures). Each CTS patient was responsible for a $7752 increase in net revenue with a positive contribution margin of $4558 compared with those in the PRE group.

CONCLUSIONS

A dedicated CTS increases subsequent visits and necessary procedures and is a positive revenue source for the trauma center. The presumptive financial burden of a CTS is incorrect and the creation of dedicated centers will improve patients' outcomes and the institution's bottom line.

Consumer perspectives of allied health involvement in a public hospital setting: cross-sectional survey and electronic health record review

Objective Consumer-centred care is fundamental to high-quality health care, with allied health professionals playing a pivotal role in hospital settings. Allied health typically operates within standard weekday working-hours. Consumer preferences for receiving allied health services are largely unexplored but could inform whether weekend and/or out-of-hours services are required. This study aims to understand consumer preferences for hospital-based inpatient and outpatient allied health services. Methods Using a cross-sectional survey and convenience sampling approach, consumers of a public health service in Melbourne, Australia were surveyed about preferences for allied health service delivery. Electronic health record reviews compared the accuracy of self-reported service delivery times. Descriptive statistics, concordance and predictive values were calculated. Responses to free-text survey items were analysed using content analysis. Results Of 120 participants (79% response rate), most (69%) received allied health services, however, almost half of inpatient responders (44%) were unsure of the specific allied health professional involved. Audit results found moderate-high concordance overall (range, 77-96%) between self-reported and audit-identified allied health services by profession. Most inpatient responders had no strong day of week preference, equally selecting weekdays and weekend days, with most preferring services between 8 am and 4 pm. Outpatient responders (81%) preferred a weekday appointment between 8 am and 12 pm or before 8 am (29%) to complete scheduled activities early in the day. Conclusion While provision of allied health services during standard working-hours was preferred by most consumers, some inpatient and outpatient consumers are receptive to receiving weekend and out-of-hours services, respectively. Decisions about offering these services should consider operational capacity and research evidence.