Citations

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 30-day postoperative mortality and palliative care consultations in patients that underwent surgical procedures in the United States before and after Medicare Access and Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (MACRA) implementation. DESIGN: Retrospective, Observational cohort study. SETTING: Secondary data were collected from the U.S. National Inpatient Sample, the largest hospital database in the country. The time span was from 2011 to 2019. PATIENTS: Adult patients that electively underwent 1 of 19 major procedures. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was cumulative postoperative mortality in two study cohorts. The secondary outcome was palliative care use. We identified 4,900,451 patients and categorized them into two study cohorts: PreM: 2011–2014 (n = 2,103,836) and PostM: 2016–2019 (n = 2,796,615). Regression discontinuity estimates and multivariate analysis were used. Across all procedures, 149,372 patients (7.1%) and 156,610 patients (5%) died within 30 days of their index procedures in the PreM and PostM cohorts, respectively. There was no statistically significant increase in mortality rates around postoperative day (POD) 30 (POD 26–30 vs 31–35) for both cohorts. More patients had inpatient palliative consultations during POD 31–60 compared with POD 1–30 in PreM (8,533 of 2,081,207 patients [0.4%] vs 1,118 of 22,629 patients [4.9%]) and PostM (18,915 of 2,791,712 patients [0.7%] vs 417 of 4,903 patients [8.5%]). Patients were more likely to receive palliative care consultations during POD 31–60 compared with POD 1–30 in both the PreM (odds ratio [OR] 5.31; 95% CI, 2.22–8.68; p < 0.001) and the PostM (OR 7.84; 95% CI, 4.83–9.10; p < 0.001) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe an increase in postoperative mortality after POD 30 before or after MACRA implementation. However, palliative care use markedly increased after POD 30. These findings should be considered hypothesis-generating because of several confounders.

Background: Safety net hospitals treat a large burden of uninsured, or Medicaid insured patients, and have been linked to worse outcomes across several medical and surgical conditions. Currently, there is limited data on the effect of safety net burden on outcomes of inpatient cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for patients that suffered in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in the US. Hypothesis: Patients that experience IHCA in high burden safety net hospitals (HBH) will have worse outcomes compared to low burden safety net hospitals (LBH). Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample database, from 2008 – 2018, we identified patients aged ≥ 18 years who experienced IHCA, using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Hospitals’ safety net burden was calculated from the proportions of Medicaid and uninsured patients using previously published methodology and categorized into LBH and HBH. Multivariate regression models were used to estimate the odds of key clinical outcomes Result: From 2008 to 2018, an estimated 555,016 unweighted adult hospitalizations underwent CPR for IHCA, out of which 19.2 % occurred at LBH and 55.2 % occurred at HBH. Compared with LBH, patients at HBH on average were younger 62 years ± 20 vs 67 years ± 17), less likely to be of White race, and more likely to be in the lowest median household income. On multivariate regression analysis, HBH was associated with lower chances of survival to hospital discharge (aOR 0.88; 95% CI 0.85 – 0.96) and lower odds of routine discharge (aOR 0.6; 95% CI 0.47 – 0.75)), compared to LBH. Patients who suffered IHCA in safety net hospitals with medium and large hospital bed size (aOR 0.96; 95% CI 0.94 – 0.98) and those publicly owned (aOR 0.95; 95% CI 0.92 – 0.98) were less likely to survive to hospital discharge. Median household income of patients in the 26 th – 100 th quartile and hospital location in the Midwest and Southern region were associated with better odds of hospital survival. Conclusion: Our study suggests that patients who experience IHCA at HBH had lower rates and odds of in-hospital survival and also less likely to be routinely discharged home. Patients’ income level and hospital-level characteristics appear to contribute to survival.

IMPORTANCE: High safety-net burden hospitals (HBHs) treating large numbers of uninsured or Medicaid-insured patients have generally been linked to worse clinical outcomes. However, limited data exist on the impact of the hospitals’ safety-net burden on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) outcomes in the United States. OBJECTIVES: To compare the differences in survival to discharge, routine discharge home, and healthcare resource utilization between patients at HBH with those treated at low safety-net burden hospital (LBH). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study across hospitals in the United States: Hospitalized patients greater than or equal to 18 years that underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) between 2008 and 2018 identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Database. Data analysis was conducted in January 2022. EXPOSURE: IHCA. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome is survival to hospital discharge. Other outcomes are routine discharge home among survivors, length of hospital stay, and total hospitalization cost RESULTS: From 2008 to 2018, an estimated 555,016 patients were hospitalized with IHCA, of which 19.2% occurred at LBH and 55.2% at HBH. Compared with LBH, patients at HBH were younger (62 ± 20 yr vs 67 ± 17 yr) and predominantly in the lowest median household income (< 25th percentile). In multivariate analysis, HBH was associated with lower chances of survival to hospital discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85–0.96) and lower odds of routine discharge (aOR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.47–0.75), compared with LBH. In addition, IHCA patients at publicly owned hospitals and those with medium and large hospital bed size were less likely to survive to hospital discharge, while patients with median household income greater than 25th percentile had better odds of hospital survival. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our study suggests that patients who experience IHCA at HBH may have lower rates and odds of in-hospital survival and are less likely to be routinely discharged home after CPR. Median household income and hospital-level characteristics appear to contribute to survival.

IMPORTANCE: Aggressive fluid resuscitation remains a cornerstone of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines, but there is growing controversy regarding the recommended 30 mL/kg IV fluid dosage. It is contended that, in selected patients, this volume confers an increased risk of volume overload without either concomitant benefit or strong evidence in support of the recommended IV fluid dosage. OBJECTIVES: Assessment of practice patterns and their impact on patient outcomes following the surviving sepsis guidelines for fluid resuscitation. DESIGN: Large, multisite retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The retrospective study included all adult patients who presented to the emergency department at one of 19 different Mayo Clinic sites throughout the Midwest, Southeast, and Southwest from August 2018 to November 2020 with suspected sepsis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Eight-thousand four-hundred fourteen patients suspected to have sepsis were assessed regarding fluid resuscitation and outcomes among patients receiving 30 mL/kg IV fluid dosing compared with patients who did not. Patient demographics and clinical information were collected via electronic health records. Patients were divided into two cohorts: those who received 0–29.9 mL/kg of IV fluid and those who received 30.0+ mL/kg of IV fluid. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of fluid dose on in-hospital death, 30-day mortality, ICU admission after diagnosis, dialysis initiation after diagnosis, ventilator use, vasopressor use, as well as ICU and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: We observed lower in-hospital mortality and 30-day mortality risk in the 30+ mL/kg dosing group. Increased fluid dosage did, however, carry a much greater chance of ICU admission. Most patients (72% after propensity score weighting) in our population received less than 30 mL/kg fluid (based on ideal body weight). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: IV fluid dosing for sepsis resuscitation greater than 30 mL/kg was associated with decreased risk of in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and reduced risk of requiring mechanical ventilation. Our data does ultimately seem to support the SSC recommendation.

US hospital quality rankings and ratings use disparate methodologies and are weakly correlated. This causes confusion for patients and hospital quality staff. At the authors’ institution, a Composite Hospital Quality Index (CHQI) was developed to combine hospital quality ratings. This approach is described and a calculator is shared here for other health systems to explore their performance. Among the US News and World Report Top 50 Hospitals, hospital-specific numeric summary scores were aggregated from the 2021 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Overall Star Rating, the Spring 2021 Leapfrog Safety Grade, and the April 2021 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Star Rating. The CHQI is the hospital-specific sum of the national percentile-rankings across these 3 ratings. In this example, mean (SD) percentiles were as follows: CMS Stars 74 (19), Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems 63 (19), Leapfrog 65 (24), with mean (SD) CHQI of 202 (49). The CHQI is used at the authors’ institution to identify improvement opportunities and ensure that high-quality care is delivered across the health system.