An evaluation of emergency general surgery transfers and a call for standardization of practices

Interhospital Transfer for Emergency General Surgery: A Contemporary National Analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) often require complex management and transfer to higher acuity facilities, especially given increasing national efforts aimed at centralizing care. We sought to characterize factors and evaluate outcomes associated with interhospital transfer using a contemporary national cohort.

METHODS

All adult hospitalizations for EGS (appendectomy, cholecystectomy, laparotomy, lysis of adhesions, small/large bowel resection, and perforated ulcer repair) ≤2 days of admission were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients initially admitted to a different institution and transferred to the operating hospital comprised the Transfer cohort (others: Non-Transfer). Multivariable models were developed to consider the association of Transfer with outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Of ∼1 653 169 patients, 107 945 (6.5%) were considered the Transfer cohort. The proportion of patients experiencing interhospital transfer increased from 5.2% to 7.7% (2016-2020, P < .001). On average, Transfer was older, more commonly of White race, and of a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index. After adjustment, increasing age, living in a rural area, receiving care in the Midwest, and decreasing income quartile were associated with greater odds of interhospital transfer. Following risk adjustment, Transfer remained linked with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.64, CI 1.49-1.80), as well as any perioperative complication (AOR 1.33, CI 1.27-1.38; Reference: Non-Transfer). Additionally, Transfer was associated with significantly longer duration of hospitalization (β + 1.04 days, CI + .91-1.17) and greater costs (β+$3,490, CI + 2840-4140).

DISCUSSION

While incidence of interhospital transfer for EGS is increasing, transfer patients face greater morbidity and resource utilization. Novel interventions are needed to optimize patient selection and improve post-transfer outcomes.

Perforated peptic ulcer disease in transferred patients is associated with significant increase in length of stay

BACKGROUND

Perforated peptic ulcer disease (PPUD) has a prevalence of 0.004-0.014% with mortality of 23.5% (Tarasconi et al. in World J Emerg Surg 15(PG-3):3, 2020). In this single center study, we examined the impact associated with patient transfer from outside facilities to our center for definitive surgical intervention (exploratory laparotomy).

METHODS

Using EPIC report workbench, we identified 27 patients between 2018 and 2021 undergoing exploratory laparotomy with a concurrent diagnosis of peptic ulcer disease, nine of which were transferred to our institution for care. We queried this population for markers of disease severity including mortality, length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and readmission rates. Manual chart reviews were performed to examine these outcomes in more detail and identify patients who had been transferred to our facility for surgery from an outside hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 27 patients were identified undergoing exploratory laparotomy for definitive treatment of PPUD. The majority of patients queried underwent level A operations, the most urgent level of activation. In our institution, a Level A operation needs to go to the operating room within one hour of arrival to the hospital. Average mortality for this patient population was 14.8%. The readmission rate was 40.1%, and average length of ICU stay post-operatively was 16 days, with 83% of non-transfer patients requiring ICU admission and 100% of transfer patients requiring ICU admission, although this was not found to be statistically significant. Average length of hospital stay was 27 days overall. For non-transfer patients and transfer patients, LOS was 20 days and 41 days, respectively, which was statistically significant by one-sided t-test (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients transferred for definitive care of PPUD in a population otherwise notable for high mortality and high readmission rates: their average length of stay compared to non-transfer patients was over twice the length, which was statistically significant. Transferred patients also had higher rates of ICU care requirement although this was not statistically significant. Further inquiry to identify modifiable variables to facilitate the care of transferred patients is warranted, especially in the context of improving quality metrics known to enhance patient outcomes, satisfaction, and value.

A National Analysis of Racial and Sex Disparities Among Interhospital Transfers for Emergency General Surgery Patients and Associated Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Studies focusing on Emergency General Surgery (EGS) and Interhospital Transfer (IHT) and the association of race and sex and morbidity and mortality are yet to be conducted. We aim to investigate the association of race and sex and outcomes among IHT patients who underwent emergency general surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review of adult patients who were transferred prior to EGS procedures using the National Surgery Quality Improvement Project from 2014 to 2020. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare outcomes (readmission, major and minor postoperative complications, and reoperation) between interhospital transfer and direct admit patients and to investigate the association of race and sex for adverse outcomes for all EGS procedures. A secondary analysis was performed for each individual EGS procedure.

RESULTS

Compared to patients transferred directly from home, IHT patients (n = 28,517) had higher odds of readmission [odds ratio (OR): 1.004, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.002-1.006), P < 0.001], major complication [adjusted OR: 1.119, 95% CI (1.117-1.121), P < 0.001), minor complication [OR: 1.078, 95% CI (1.075-1.080), P < 0.001], and reoperation [OR: 1.014, 95% CI (1.013-1.015), P < 0.001]. In all EGS procedures, Black patients had greater odds of minor complication [OR 1.041, 95% CI (1.023-1.060), P < 0.001], Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander patients had greater odds of readmission [OR 1.081, 95% CI (1.008-1.160), P = 0.030], while Asian and Hispanic patients had lower odds of adverse outcome, and female patients had greater odds of minor complication [OR 1.017, 95% CI (1.008-1.027), P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Procedure-specific racial and sex-related disparities exist in emergency general surgery patients who underwent interhospital transfer. Specific interventions should be implemented to address these disparities to improve the safety of emergency procedures.

[Consultations by senior physicians in general and abdominal surgery for other medical disciplines over 10 years at a tertiary center-Is a fast time-consuming processing necessary? : Spectrum of clinical findings, diagnoses and treatment decision making]

BACKGROUND

The challenges of an adequate, efficient and rational medical treatment and care of patients are always associated with an interprofessional activity of several specialist disciplines.

AIM

The spectrum of variable diagnoses and the profile of surgical decision-making with further surgical measures within the framework of senior physician consultation in general and visceral surgery for neighboring medical disciplines were analyzed on a representative patient cohort over a defined observational time period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients (n = 549 cases) were documented as part of a clinical systematic prospective single center observational study at a tertiary center using a computer-based patient registry over 10 years (1 October 2006-30 September 2016). The data were analyzed with respect to the spectrum of clinical findings, diagnoses, treatment decisions and the influencing factors as well as gender and age differences and time-dependent developmental trends using χ2-tests and U‑tests.

RESULTS (KEY POINTS)

The predominant discipline for requests for surgical consultation was cardiology (19.9%) followed by surgical disciplines (11.8%) and gastroenterology (11.3%). Disorders of wound healing (7.1%) and acute abdomen (7.1%) were predominant in the diagnostic profile. In 11.7% of the patients the indications for immediate surgery were derived, whereas in 12.9% elective surgery was recommended. The conformity rate of suspected and definitive diagnoses was only 58.4%.

CONCLUSION

The surgical consultation work is an important mainstay of a sufficient and especially timely clarification of surgically relevant questions in nearly all medical institutions and especially in a center. This serves i) the quality assurance of surgery in the clinical care of patients with need of additional interdisciplinary needs for surgical treatment in the daily practice of general and abdominal surgery in research on clinical care, ii) clinical marketing and monetary aspects in the sense of patient recruitment and iii) last but not least to provide emergency care of patients. Due to the high proportion of 12% of subsequent emergency operations, which were derived from requests for general and visceral surgical consultations, such requests must be processed promptly during working hours.

Greater patient sharing between hospitals is associated with better outcomes for transferred emergency general surgery patients

BACKGROUND

Access to emergency surgical care has declined as the rural workforce has decreased. Interhospital transfers of patients are increasingly necessary, and care coordination across settings is critical to quality care. We characterize the role of repeated hospital patient sharing in outcomes of transfers for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients.

METHODS

A multicenter study of Wisconsin inpatient acute care hospital stays that involved transfer of EGS patients using data from the Wisconsin Hospital Association, a statewide hospital discharge census for 2016 to 2018. We hypothesized that higher proportion of patients transferred between hospitals would result in better outcomes. We examined the association between the proportion of EGS patients transferred between hospitals and patient outcomes, including in-hospital morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. Additional variables included hospital organizational characteristics and patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

One hundred eighteen hospitals transferred 3,197 emergency general surgery patients over the 2-year study period; 1,131 experienced in-hospital morbidity, mortality, or extended length of stay (>75th percentile). Patients were 62 years old on average, 50% were female, and 5% were non-White. In the mixed-effects model, hospitals' proportion of patients shared was associated with lower odds of an in-hospital complication; specifically, when the proportion of patients shared between two hospitals doubled, the relative odds of any outcome changed by 0.85.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest the importance of emergent relationships between hospital dyads that share patients in quality outcomes. Transfer protocols should account for established efficiencies, familiarity, and coordination between hospitals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Complexity of Transferred Geriatric Adults Requiring Emergency General Surgery: A Rural Tertiary Center Experience

INTRODUCTION

As the American population ages, the number of geriatric adults requiring emergency general surgery (EGS) care is increasing. EGS regionalization could significantly affect the pattern of care for rural older adults. The aim of this study was to determine the current pattern of care for geriatric EGS patients at our rural academic center, with a focus on transfer status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients aged ≥65 undergoing EGS procedures within 48 h of admission from 2014 to 2019 at our rural academic medical center. We collected demographic, admission, operative, and outcomes data. The primary outcomes of interest were mortality and nonhome discharge. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Over the 5-y study period, 674 patients underwent EGS procedures, with 407 (60%) transferred to our facility. Transfer patients (TPs) had higher American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores (P < 0.001), higher rates of open abdomen (13% versus 5.6%, P = 0.001), and multiple operations (24 versus 11%, P < 0.001) than direct admit patients. However, after adjustment there was no difference in mortality (OR 1.64; 95% CI, 0.82-3.38) or nonhome discharge (OR 1.49; 95% CI, 0.95-2.36).

CONCLUSIONS

At our institution, the majority of rural geriatric EGS patients were transferred from another hospital for care. These patients had higher medical and operative complexity than patients presenting directly to our facility for care. After adjustment, transfer status was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality or nonhome discharge. These patients were appropriately transferred given their level of complexity.

Racial and ethnic disparities in interhospital transfer for complex emergency general surgical disease across the United States

BACKGROUND

Differential access to specialty surgical care can drive health care disparities, and interhospital transfer (IHT) is one mechanism through which access barriers can be realized for vulnerable populations. The association between race/ethnicity and IHT for patients presenting with complex emergency general surgery (EGS) disease is understudied.

METHODS

Using the 2019 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, we identified patients 18 years and older with 1 of 13 complex EGS diseases based on International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision , diagnosis codes. The primary outcome was IHT. A series of weighted logistic regression models was created to determine the association of race/ethnicity with the primary outcome while controlling for patient and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 387,610 weighted patient encounters from 989 hospitals, 59,395 patients (15.3%) underwent IHT. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, rates of IHT were significantly lower for non-Hispanic Black (15% vs. 17%; unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) [95% confidence interval (CI)], 0.58 [0.49-0.68]; p < 0.001), Hispanic/Latinx (HL) (9.0% vs. 17%; uOR [95% CI], 0.48 [0.43-0.54]; p < 0.001), Asian/Pacific Islander (Asian/PI) (11% vs. 17%; uOR [95% CI], 0.84 [0.78-0.91]; p < 0.001), and other race/ethnicity (12% vs. 17%; uOR [95% CI], 0.68 [0.57-0.81]; p < 0.001) patients. In multivariable models, the adjusted odds of IHT remained significantly lower for HL (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.76 [0.72-0.83]; p < 0.001) and Asian/PI patients (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.73 [0.62-0.86]; p < 0.001) but not for non-Hispanic Black and other race/ethnicity patients ( p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In a nationally representative sample of emergency departments across the United States, patients of minority race/ethnicity presenting with complex EGS disease were less likely to undergo IHT when compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Disparities persisted for HL and Asian/PI patients when controlling for comorbid conditions, hospital and residential geography, neighborhood socioeconomic status, and insurance; these patients may face unique barriers in accessing surgical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

Interfacility Transfer for Nonelective Cholecystectomy in High MELD Patients: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Interfacility transfer to a referral center is often considered for patients with liver disease undergoing nonelective cholecystectomy given management complexities and perioperative risk. We sought to determine the association between the Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, transfer frequency, and outcomes in those patients using a national database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP participant use files were queried for nonelective open or laparoscopic cholecystectomy from 2016 to 2018. Patients were grouped according to low (6-11), intermediate (12-18), or high (>18) MELD. In the high MELD group, patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between transferred and nontransferred patients and multivariate regression was performed to evaluate independent predictors of outcomes. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, complications, length-of-stay (LOS), and 30-d reoperation and readmission.

RESULTS

30,171 subjects were included. Transfer was more likely as MELD increased (19.5% high versus 12.1% low, P < 0.001). High MELD patients had increased LOS, reoperation, readmission, and mortality rates compared to low MELD. In high MELD patients (n = 1016), those transferred were more likely older, white, obese, and septic. Transferred patients had increased mortality (7.6% versus 4.2%, P = 0.044), LOS, reoperation, and complications. After controlling for differences between transferred and nontransferred patients, transfer status was not independently associated with mortality (OR = 1.593, P = 0.177), postoperative complications or LOS, but was associated with increased risk for reoperation. Sepsis and laparoscopic surgery were independently associated with higher and lower mortality, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Transfer status is not independently associated with mortality, postoperative complications, or prolonged LOS, suggesting patients with advanced liver disease undergoing acute cholecystectomy may not benefit from interfacility transfer.

Factors influencing interhospital transfer delays in emergency general surgery: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Emergency general surgery is an emerging public health issue globally, with substantial healthcare burden. Interhospital transfer of critically unwell surgical patients has been the mainstay of bridging gaps in surgical coverage in regional and rural locations, despite evidence of greater morbidity and mortality. Delays in transfer invariably occurs and compounds the situation. Our aim was to examine the factors influencing interhospital transfer delays in emergency general surgical patients.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMED and EmBase, was performed by two researchers from 2020 to 23rd Feb 2021, for English articles related to interhospital transfer delays in emergency general surgical patients, with an age of >16. Articles were critically appraised and data were extracted into a pre-specified data extraction form. No data was suitable for statistical analysis and a narrative synthesis was performed instead.

RESULTS

Six relevant articles were identified from the search. All studies were retrospective cohort studies with moderate to high risk of bias. Lack of consultant surgeon input, after hours transfer, need for intensive care bed and poor transfer documentation may have a role in interhospital transfer delays. Patients with public health insurance, multiple comorbidities and non-emergency medical conditions experience longer transfer request time and may be at risk of precipitating interhospital transfer delays. Transfer delays are seen in transfers over longer distances.

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of knowledge on what and how factors influence interhospital transfer delays in emergency general surgical patients. Well-designed prospective cohort studies are required to bridge this knowledge gap.

Predicting Outcomes for Interhospital Transferred Patients of Emergency General Surgery

Background. Interhospital transferred (IHT) emergency general surgery (EGS) patients are associated with high care intensity and mortality. However, prior studies do not focus on patient-level data. Our study, using each IHT patient’s data, aimed to understand the underlying cause for IHT EGS patients’ outcomes. We hypothesized that transfer origin of EGS patients impacts outcomes due to critical illness as indicated by higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and disease severity. Materials and Methods. We conducted a retrospective analysis of all adult patients transferred to our quaternary academic center’s EGS service from 01/2014 to 12/2016. Only patients transferred to our hospital with EGS service as the primary service were eligible. We used multivariable logistic regression and probit analysis to measure the association of patients’ clinical factors and their outcomes (mortality and survivors’ hospital length of stay [HLOS]). Results. We analyzed 708 patients, 280 (39%) from an ICU, 175 (25%) from an ED, and 253 (36%) from a surgical ward. Compared to ED patients, patients transferred from the ICU had higher mean (SD) SOFA score (5.7 (4.5) vs. 2.39 (2), $P<0.001$ ), longer HLOS, and higher mortality. Transferring from ICU (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.36–6.41, $P=0.006$ ), requiring laparotomy (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.04–3.70, $P=0.039$ ), and SOFA score (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.13–1.32, $P<0.001$ ) were associated with higher mortality. Conclusions. At our academic center, patients transferred from an ICU were more critically ill and had longer HLOS and higher mortality. We identified SOFA score and a few conditions and diagnoses as associated with patients’ outcomes. Further studies are needed to confirm our observation.

Emergency General Surgery Quality Improvement: A Review of Recommended Structure and Key Issues

Emergency general surgery (EGS) accounts for 11% of hospital admissions, with more than 3 million admissions per year and more than 50% of operative mortality in the US. Recent research into EGS has ignited multiple quality improvement initiatives, and the process of developing national standards and verification in EGS has been initiated. Such programs for quality improvement in EGS include registry formation, protocol and standards creation, evidenced-based protocols, disease-specific protocol implementation, regional collaboratives, targeting of high-risk procedures such as exploratory laparotomy, focus on special populations like geriatrics, and targeting improvements in high opportunity outcomes such as failure to rescue. The authors present a collective narrative review of advances in quality improvement structure in EGS in recent years and summarize plans for a national EGS registry and American College of Surgeons verification for this under-resourced area of surgery.

The unequal impact of interhospital transfers on emergency general surgery patients: Procedure risk and time to surgery matter

BACKGROUND

The impact of interhospital transfer on outcomes of patients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures is incompletely studied. We set out to determine if transfer before definitive surgical care leads to worse outcomes in EGS patients.

METHODS

Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database (2013-2019), a retrospective cohort study was conducted including nine surgical procedures encompassing 80% of the burden of EGS diseases, performed on an urgent/emergent basis. The procedures were classified as low risk (open and laparoscopic appendectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy) and high risk (open cholecystectomy, laparoscopic and open colectomy, lysis of adhesions, perforated ulcer repair, small bowel resection, and exploratory laparotomy). Time to surgery was recorded in days. The impact of interhospital transfer on outcomes (mortality, major complications, 30-day reoperations, and 30-day readmissions) and length of stay, according to procedure risk and time to surgery, were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression and inverse probability treatment of the weighting with treatment effect in the treated.

RESULTS

A total of 329,613 patients were included in the study (284,783 direct admission and 44,830 transfers). Adjusted mortality (3.1% vs. 10.4%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.28; p < 0.001), major complications (6.7% vs. 18.9%; AOR, 1.39; p < 0.001), 30-day reoperations (3.1% vs. 6.4%; AOR, 1.22; p < 0.001), and length of stay (2 vs. 5) were higher in transferred patients. Transfer had no effect on 30-day readmissions (6% vs. 8.5%; AOR, 1.04; p = 0.063). These results were also observed in high-risk surgery patients and in the late surgery group. The results were further confirmed after robust propensity score weighting was performed.

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated that delays to surgical intervention affect outcomes and that interhospital transfer of EGS patients for definitive surgical care has a negative impact on mortality, development of postoperative complications, and reoperations in patients undergoing high-risk EGS procedures. These findings may have important implications for regionalization of EGS care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic/epidemiological, level III.

Factors associated with potentially avoidable interhospital transfers in emergency general surgery-A call for quality improvement efforts

BACKGROUND

Emergency general surgery conditions are common, require urgent surgical evaluation, and are associated with high mortality and costs. Although appropriate interhospital transfers are critical to successful emergency general surgery care, the performance of emergency general surgery transfer systems remains unclear. We aimed to describe emergency general surgery transfer patterns and identify factors associated with potentially avoidable transfers.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of emergency general surgery episodes in 8 US states using the 2016 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases and the American Hospital Association Annual Surveys. We identified Emergency Department-to-Inpatient and Inpatient-to-Inpatient interhospital emergency general surgery transfers. Potentially avoidable transfers were defined as discharge within 72 hours after transfer without undergoing any procedure or operation at the destination hospital. We examined transfer incidence and characteristics. We performed multilevel regression examining patient-level and hospital-level factors associated with potentially avoidable transfers.

RESULTS

Of 514,410 adult emergency general surgery episodes, 26,281 (5.1%) involved interhospital transfers (Emergency Department-to-Inpatient: 65.0%, Inpatient-to-Inpatient: 35.1%). Over 1 in 4 transfers were potentially avoidable (7,188, 27.4%), with the majority occurring from the emergency department. Factors associated with increased odds of potentially avoidable transfers included self-pay (versus government insurance, odds ratio: 1.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.09-1.45, P = .002), level 1 trauma centers (versus non-trauma centers, odds ratio: 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.47, P = .01), and critical access hospitals (versus non-critical access, odds ratio: 1.30, 95% confidence interval: 1.15-1.47, P < .001). Hospital-level factors (size, trauma center, ownership, critical access, location) accounted for 36.1% of potentially avoidable transfers variability.

CONCLUSION

Over 1 in 4 emergency general surgery transfers are potentially avoidable. Understanding factors associated with potentially avoidable transfers can guide research, quality improvement, and infrastructure development to optimize emergency general surgery care.

The Effect of Transfer on Outcomes in Burns

Patients with burn injuries are often initially transported to centers without burn capabilities, requiring subsequent transfer to a higher level of care. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of this treatment delay on outcomes. Adult burn patients meeting American Burn Association (ABA) criteria for transfer at a single burn center were retrospectively identified. A total of 122 patients were evenly divided into two cohorts - those directly admitted to a burn center from the field, versus those transferred to a burn center from an outlying facility. There was no difference between the transfer and direct admit cohorts with respect to age, percent total body surface area burned, concomitant injury, or intubation prior to admission. Transfer patients experienced a longer median time from injury to burn center admission (1 vs. 8 hours, p &lt, 0.01). Directly admitted patients were more likely to have inhalation burn (18 vs. 4, p &lt, 0.01), require intubation after admission (10 vs. 2, p = 0.03), require an emergent procedure (18 vs. 5, p &lt, 0.01), and develop infectious complications (14 vs. 5, p = 0.04). There was no difference in ventilator days, number of operations, length of stay, or mortality. The results suggest that significantly injured, high acuity burn patients were more likely to be immediately identified and taken directly to a burn center. Patients who otherwise met ABA criteria for transfer were not affected by short delays in transfer to definitive burn care.