Surgical outcomes and travel burden among medicare beneficiaries living in Health Professional Shortage Areas

Higher Rates Of Emergency Surgery, Serious Complications, And Readmissions In Primary Care Shortage Areas, 2015-19

Primary care physicians are often the first to screen and identify patients with access-sensitive surgical conditions that should be treated electively. These conditions require surgery that is preferably planned (elective), but, when access is limited, treatment may be delayed and worsening symptoms lead to emergency surgery (for example, colectomy for cancer, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and incisional hernia repair). We evaluated the rates of elective versus emergency surgery for patients with three access-sensitive surgical conditions living in primary care Health Professional Shortage Areas during 2015-19. Medicare beneficiaries in more severe primary care shortage areas had higher rates of emergency surgery compared with rates in the least severe shortage areas (37.8 percent versus 29.9 percent). They were also more likely to have serious complications (14.9 percent versus 11.7 percent) and readmissions (15.7 percent versus 13.5 percent). When we accounted for areas with a shortage of surgeons, the findings were similar. Taken together, these findings suggest that residents of areas with greater primary care workforce shortages may also face challenges in accessing elective surgical care. As policy makers consider investing in Health Professional Shortage Areas, our findings underscore the importance of primary care access to a broader range of services.

Association of Health Professional Shortage Area Hospital Designation With Surgical Outcomes and Expenditures Among Medicare Beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE

To compare surgical outcomes and expenditures at hospitals located in Health Professional Shortage Areas to nonshortage area designated hospitals among Medicare beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND

More than a quarter of Americans live in federally designated Health Professional Shortage Areas. Although there is growing concern that medical outcomes may be worse, far less is known about hospitals providing surgical care in these areas.

METHODS

Cross-sectional retrospective study from 2014 to 2018 of 842,787 Medicare beneficiary patient admissions to hospitals with and without Health Professional Shortage Area designations for common operations including appendectomy, cholecystectomy, colectomy, and hernia repair. We assessed risk-adjusted outcomes using multivariable logistic regression accounting for patient factors, admission type, and year were compared for each of the 4 operations. Hospital expenditures were price-standardized, risk-adjusted 30-day surgical episode payments. Primary outcome measures included 30-day mortality, hospital readmissions, and 30-day surgical episode payments.

RESULTS

Patients (mean age=75.6 years, males=44.4%) undergoing common surgical procedures in shortage area hospitals were less likely to be White (84.6% vs 88.4%, P <0.001) and less likely to have≥2 Elixhauser comorbidities (75.5% vs 78.2%, P <0.001). Patients undergoing surgery at Health Professional Shortage Area hospitals had lower risk-adjusted rates of 30-day mortality (6.05% vs 6.69%, odds ratio=0.90, CI, 0.90-0.91, P <0.001) and readmission (14.99% vs 15.74%, odds ratio=0.94, CI, 0.94-0.95, P <0.001). Medicare expenditures at Health Professional Shortage Area hospitals were also lower than nonshortage designated hospitals ($28,517 vs $29,685, difference= -$1168, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients presenting to Health Professional Shortage Area hospitals obtain safe care for common surgical procedures without evidence of higher expenditures among Medicare beneficiaries. These findings should be taken into account as current legislative proposals to increase funding for care in these underserved communities are considered.

Surgical Procedures at Critical Access Hospitals Within Hospital Networks

OBJECTIVE

To compare surgical outcomes and expenditures at critical access hospitals that do versus do not participate in a hospital network among Medicare beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND

Critical access hospitals provide essential care to more than 80 million Americans. These hospitals, often rural, are located more than 35 miles away from another hospital and are required to maintain patient transfer agreements with other facilities capable of providing higher levels of care. Some critical access hospitals have gone further to formally participate in a hospital network.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional retrospective study from 2014 to 2018 comparing 16,128 Medicare beneficiary admissions for appendectomy, cholecystectomy, colectomy, or hernia repair at critical access hospitals that do versus do not participate in a hospital network. Thirty-day mortality and readmissions were risk adjusted using multivariable logistic regression accounting for patient and hospital factors. Price-standardized, risk-adjusted Medicare expenditures were compared for the 30-day total episode payments consisting of index hospitalization, physician services, readmissions, and postacute care payments.

RESULTS

Beneficiaries (average age = 75.7 years, SD = 7.4) who obtained care at critical access hospitals in a hospital network were more likely to carry ≥2 Elixhauser comorbidities (68.7% vs. 62.8%, P < 0.001). Rates of 30-day mortality were higher at critical access hospitals in a hospital network (4.30% vs. 3.81%, OR = 1.11, P < 0.001). Similarly, readmission rates were higher at critical access hospitals that were in a hospital network (15.13% vs. 14.34%, OR = 1.06, P < 0.001). Additionally, total episode payments were found to be $960 higher per patient at critical access hospitals that were in a hospital network ($23,878 vs. $22,918, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Critical access hospitals within hospital networks provided care to more medically complex patients and were associated with worse clinical outcomes and higher costs among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing common general surgery operations.

High-risk surgery among Medicare beneficiaries living in health professional shortage areas

PURPOSE

Americans who reside in health professional shortage areas currently have less than half of the needed physician workforce. While the shortage designation has been associated with poor outcomes for chronic medical conditions, far less is known about outcomes after high-risk surgical procedures.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of Medicare beneficiaries living in health professional shortage areas and nonshortage areas who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, coronary artery bypass graft, esophagectomy, liver resection, pancreatectomy, or rectal resection between 2014 and 2018. Risk-adjusted multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether rates of postoperative complications and 30-day mortality differed between patient cohorts. Beneficiary and hospital ZIP codes were used to quantify travel time to obtain care.

FINDINGS

Compared with patients living in nonshortage areas, patients living in health professional shortage areas traveled longer (median 60.0 vs 28.0 minutes, P<.001). There were no differences in risk-adjusted rates of complications (28.5% vs 28.6%, OR = 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.00, P = .59) and small differences in rates of 30-day mortality (4.2% vs 4.4%, OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.95-0.95, P<.001) between beneficiaries living in shortage areas versus those not in shortage areas, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients living in health professional shortage area undergoing high-risk surgery traveled more than 2 times longer for their care to obtain similar outcomes. While reassuring for clinical outcomes, additional efforts may be needed to mitigate the travel burden experienced by shortage area patients.

A Proposed Framework for Measuring Access to Surgical Care in the United States

In this Viewpoint, the authors evaluate access to surgical care using the domains of timeliness, workforce density, infrastructure, safety, and affordability and discuss how such a framework could be applied in the United States.

Social Vulnerability And Outcomes For Access-Sensitive Surgical Conditions Among Medicare Beneficiaries

Concerns have been raised over wide variation in rates of unplanned (emergency or urgent) surgery for access-sensitive surgical conditions-diagnoses requiring surgery that preferably is planned (elective) but, when access is limited, may be delayed until worsening symptoms require riskier and costlier unplanned surgery. Yet little is known about geographic and community-level factors that may increase the likelihood of unplanned surgery with adverse outcomes. We examined the relationship between community-level social vulnerability and rates of unplanned surgery for three access-sensitive conditions in 2014-18 among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries ages 65-99. Compared with patients from communities with the lowest social vulnerability, those from communities with the highest vulnerability were more likely, overall, to undergo unplanned surgery (36.2 percent versus 33.5 percent). They were also more likely to experience worse outcomes largely attributable to differential rates of unplanned surgery, including higher rates of mortality (5.4 percent versus 5.0 percent) and additional surgery within thirty days (19.6 percent versus 18.1 percent). Our findings suggest that policy addressing community-level social vulnerability may mitigate the observed differences in surgical procedures and outcomes for access-sensitive conditions.