RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The aim of this project was to compare patient characteristics, overall efficacy, and readmission events following operative vs non-operative management modalities of non-elective patients presenting with symptomatic incisional hernias. METHODS: This study is a retrospective study of patients and patient demographics that presented as non-elective hospitalizations with symptomatic incisional hernia. Analysis of patients and characteristics utilized the National Readmission Database from 2010 to Q3 of 2015, delineating patient factors and outcomes following operative or non-operative management of hernias. RESULTS: A total of 14,137 patients met inclusion criteria for our study. The majority of patients were treated operatively rather than non-operatively (79 vs. 21%) on their non-elective admission for incisional hernia. Those undergoing surgical management were younger (56 vs 61 years, p < 0.01), we more often of male gender (69 vs 64%, p < 0.01), and had fewer comorbidities (1.92 vs 2.97, p < 0.01) and chronic conditions (0.45 vs 2.68, p < 0.01). Patients managed operatively had a significantly lower readmission rate when compared to patients managed non-operatively (6.6 vs 14.3%, p < 0.01). However, non-operative management was associated with a shorter length of stay (3 vs 4 days, p < 0.01). Of patients who were initially medically managed and had to be readmitted, a further 61% underwent surgical treatment on their readmission. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study, patients with non-elective admissions for incisional hernia were mostly managed surgically. Those managed operatively had lower rates of readmission when compared to non-operative management. Initial non-operative management was associated with a shorter length of stay and a lower cost to the patient. The results of this study support operative management of symptomatic incisional hernia.
Asunto(s)
Hernia Ventral , Hernia Incisional , Laparoscopía , Humanos , Masculino , Hernia Incisional/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Readmisión del Paciente , Herniorrafia/efectos adversos , Herniorrafia/métodos , Hospitalización , Hernia Ventral/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The precision of emergency medical services (EMS) triage criteria dictates whether an injured patient receives appropriate care. The trauma triage protocol is a decision scheme that groups patients into triage categories of major, moderate and minor. We hypothesized that there is a difference between trauma triage category and injury severity score (ISS). METHODS: This retrospective, observational study was conducted to investigate a difference between trauma triage category and ISS. Bivariate analysis was used to test for differences between the subgroup means. The differences between the group means on each measure were analyzed for direction and statistical significance using ANOVA for continuous variables and chi square tests for categorical variables. Logistic and linear regressions were performed to evaluate factors predicting mortality, ICU length of stay. RESULTS: With respect to trauma triage category, our findings indicate that minor and moderate triage categories are similar with respect to ISS, GCS, ICU LOS, hospital LOS, and mortality. However, after excluding for low impact injuries (falls), differences between the minor and moderate categories were evident when comparing to ISS, GCS, ICU LOS, and hospital LOS. Additionally, after excluding for low impact injures, ISS, ICU LOS, and hospital stay were found to correlate well with trauma triage category. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective, observational study significant differences were not seen when comparing ISS with the trauma triage categories of moderate and minor during our initial analysis. However, a difference was found after excluding for low impact injuries. These findings suggest that CDC criteria accurately predicts outcomes in high impact trauma.
Asunto(s)
Triaje , Heridas y Lesiones , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Humanos , Puntaje de Gravedad del Traumatismo , Estudios Retrospectivos , Centros Traumatológicos , Triaje/métodos , Estados Unidos , Heridas y Lesiones/terapiaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most common surgical operations, yet the optimal treatment strategy remains undefined. Treatment of symptomatic inguinal hernias include both surgical and non-surgical approaches. The objective of this study was to determine differences in population, readmission rates, and costs between operative and non-operative approaches for patients admitted non-electively for an inguinal hernia in a national dataset. In addition, we sought to define the baseline characteristics of the two groups and identify potential predictive factors in the non-surgically managed subgroup who were readmitted and treated operatively within 90 days of their first visit. METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of data from the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) from 2010 to 2014. Patients above age 18 who were admitted non-electively for a primary diagnosis of inguinal hernia were included. Patients whose length of stay was < 1% or > 95% percentile or died during the initial visit were excluded. Readmissions within 90 days of the initial visit were flagged. Patients were classified according to initial management strategy: operative versus non-operative. Demographic, clinical, and organizational characteristics were compared between the two cohorts. RESULTS: 14,249 patients met inclusion criteria and were operative (n = 8996, 63.13%) and non-operative (n = 5255, 36.88%) cohorts. When comparing the two groups, readmission rate was lower (0.49% for surgical, 1.78% for non-surgical, p < 0.01), mean length of stay (LOS) longer (3.27 [SE = 0.05] days for surgical, 2.76 days [SE = 0.06] for non-surgical, p < 0.01), and mean total cost higher ($9597 for surgical, $7167 for non-surgical, p < 0.01) in surgically treated patients. The non-surgical population was on average older (63.05 years for surgical, 64.52 years for non-surgical, p < 0.01) with more chronic conditions (3.57 for surgical, 4.05 for non-surgical, p < 0.01). Of the patients initially managed non-surgically, 1.78% (n = 91) were readmitted, and of them, 62.63% (n = 57) were readmitted and managed surgically within 90 days of initial admission (i.e., crossed over from watchful waiting to surgical treatment). Average number of chronic conditions (3.79 versus 4.03, p = 0.74), average number of comorbidities (2.26 versus 2.18, p = 0.87), and average total number of ICD-9 discharge codes (7.44 versus 8.23 p = 0.54 did not differ significantly between the operative versus non-operative sample of the readmitted population. The total cost ($5562.38 versus $8737.28, p = 0.01) was greater in the operative versus non-operative sample. CONCLUSION: Watchful-waiting strategy is the most common treatment approach in patients admitted non-electively for symptomatic inguinal hernia. Readmission after non-elective hospitalization for inguinal hernia is rare, but surgical intervention decreased the likelihood of readmission compared to non-operative management, while also increasing LOS and cost of care. Our data supports a patient centric approach to the management; non-surgical treatment is a viable temporary option even in symptomatic inguinal hernias, while surgical treatment may reduce the likelihood of future readmission.