Abstract
Importance Variation in outcomes for emergency general surgery conditions has been shown at the hospital level. Few have examined difference across hospitals for older adults who often present with the greatest risk. To date, no one has examined differences in the outcome for those undergoing operative and nonoperative treatment.
Objective Identify high and low performing emergency general surgery (EGS) hospitals with risk-standardization to determine clinical performance differences as well as correlation between patients treated operatively and non-operatively.
Design A retrospective cohort study with 30-day outcomes.
Setting Nationwide study of acute care hospitals.
Participants Medicare beneficiaries > 65.5 years old hospitalized for an emergency general surgery condition admitted from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2018.
Exposure Unique hospital identification.
Main outcome A composite metric of 30-day mortality, adverse events, prolonged length of stay, and readmission.
Results There were 536,284 total patients with a mean age of 74.4 ± 12.2 years, 55% female, 84% white with average claims-based frailty index of 0.16 ± 0.06 and mean comorbidity count of 3.57 ± 2.46. Amongst the 1866 hospitals identified, there were 3 best performing and 11 worst performing hospitals. There were weak correlations between operative and non-operative for mortality (0.10), adverse events rates (0.21), prolonged length of stay (0.32), and readmissions (0.18) at the hospital level (all p<0.001).
Conclusions and Relevance Significant variation exists in EGS hospital performance with best ranked hospitals out-performing worst ranked hospitals on adverse event, mortality, prolonged length of stay and readmission. There is little association between patient outcomes for those treated with operative and non-operative care.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01AG060612
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos