Teaching Status: The Impact on Emergency and Elective Surgical Care in the US

Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Annals of surgery (Impact Factor: 8.33). 03/2011; 253(5):1017-23. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182171fd1
Source: PubMed


To examine the relation between hospital teaching status and surgical outcomes for both emergency and elective general surgery cases using a national database.
Teaching hospitals (TH) have been shown to have better outcomes for complex elective surgical cases when compared with nonteaching hospitals (NTH). Less is known about the effect of teaching status on outcomes for more common procedures, especially where emergency surgical cases are concerned. Worse outcomes seen in this cohort are often attributed to patient disease, but systems level variables such as TH status may also play a role.
We performed a nationally representative retrospective cohort study of surgical admissions during 2000 to 2006 using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Patients were included if they were more than 18 years of age and had a general surgical procedure performed on the day of admission. We examined unadjusted and adjusted in-hospital mortality (IHM) and postoperative complications (POC) for elective and emergency patients.
We identified 1,052,809 admissions. Patients treated at THs were more likely to be nonwhite and at extremes of income when compared with those treated at NTH. Adjusted outcomes revealed an increased risk of IHM at TH (overall OR = 1.20; 95% CI 1.03-1.40, P = 0.017) for emergency admissions with no difference in IHM seen after elective procedures. Postoperative infections were more likely to occur at TH than NTH after elective procedures (OR = 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.17, P < 0.007). Postoperative fistula was more likely to occur at TH than NTH after elective surgery (OR = 1.56; 95% CI 1.32-1.85, P < 0.005) whereas postoperative ileus was less likely to occur at TH than NTH (OR = 0.82; 95% CI 0.74-0.91, P = 0.002).
Teaching status is associated with increased risk of IHM after emergency cases. POC profiles also differ by TH status. Investigation of the way in which systems-level variables that differ between TH and NTH contribute to postoperative outcomes may identify novel targets for performance improvement.

11 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this study is to provide nationally representative estimates of cleft palate correction and revision procedures performed in hospitalized patients, as well as to examine patient- and hospital-level factors associated with hospitalization charges. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample for the year 2007 was used. All hospitalizations that had a cleft palate correction or revision of cleft palate repair were selected. Estimates of concomitant procedures performed during the index hospitalization were obtained. The roles of different patient- and hospital-level variables on hospitalization charges were examined by use of multivariable linear regression analysis. A total of 5,969 repairs and/or revisions of cleft palate procedures were performed in hospitals in the entire United States. The mean age per hospitalization was 3.2 years. Whites accounted for 51.3% of procedures, whereas blacks, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and other races accounted for 4.9%, 26.4%, 9.2%, 3.2%, and 5%, respectively. The mean charge per each hospitalization was $19,227, and the total hospitalization charge for the entire United States was $112.96 million. Patients aged less than 1 year (P = .02) and those aged between 8 and 12 years (P = .03) had significantly lower charges compared with those aged 18 years or older. Use of bone morphogenetic protein was associated with higher hospital charges (P = .0006). Compared with the uninsured, those covered by Medicaid (P = .04), private insurance plans (P = .02), and other insurance plans (P = .0005) were associated with higher charges. This study identified an association between hospital charges and insurance payer, race, treatments performed, and age. Our results provide insights into nationally representative estimates on management of cleft palate corrections and revisions.
    Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 10/2011; 70(8):1968-77. DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2011.07.026 · 1.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Data on the characteristics and outcomes of patients operated on by surgical residents are limited. Using ACS-NSQIP (2005-2008), characteristics and outcomes of patients who underwent cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or inguinal hernia repair by a resident (R) without an attending scrubbed in the operating room, a scrubbed attending with resident (AR), or an attending without resident (A) were pooled and compared. Data analyses involved χ(2), ANOVA, and multivariate regression. The R group performed <1% of ACS-NSQIP cases; the 10 most common procedures represented 69.1% of cases. There were 912 cases of cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or inguinal hernia repair performed by R. Compared with A/AR patients, R patients were more likely to have inpatient (42.6%, 48.9% versus 64.8%), emergent (28.6%, 30.8% versus 35.5%) , and open procedures (27.0%, 29.4% versus 28.9%) (all P < 0.001). In unadjusted analyses, R patients had higher complication rates (4.8% versus 4.4%, 3.4%, P < 0.001) and longer operating time (64.4min versus 62.2min, 44.7min, P < 0.001) than AR/A patients respectively. After risk adjustment, a resident operating without an attending scrubbed in the operating room was not independently associated with increased complications risk (odds ratio 1.2, 95% CI: 0.8-1.8, P = 0.2). Compared with A/AR patients, there was a 1-min difference in adjusted operating time for patients who underwent surgery by R (P < 0.001). In ACS-NSQIP, a resident rarely performs surgery without an attending scrubbed in the operating room; surgical attendings appear to exercise good judgment in determining the appropriate extent of resident supervision in the operating room without compromising patient outcomes.
    Journal of Surgical Research 03/2012; 178(1):126-32. DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2011.12.033 · 1.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Object: The presence of a "July effect," where the influx of new residents and fellows at teaching hospitals every July may negatively affect patient care and outcomes, is widely debated. The authors used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to identify all cases of spinal surgery and examine outcomes among patients who underwent surgery in July compared with those who underwent surgery in other months. Methods: Spinal surgery hospitalizations from 2001 to 2008 were identified in the NIS by extracting relevant ICD-9 codes. Rates of in-hospital mortality, discharge to a long-term care facility, and postoperative complications were compared between admission months and between teaching and nonteaching hospitals using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Fisher exact test, and multivariate regression analysis. Results: Compared with patients admitted in other months, patients who were admitted to teaching hospitals in July for spinal surgery showed a similar likelihood of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.94 [95% CI 0.78-1.11], p = 0.46), reaction to implanted device/instrumentation (OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.77-1.02], p = 0.09), and postoperative wound dehiscence (OR 1.12 [95% CI 0.94-1.33], p = 0.25). A significantly higher likelihood of discharge to a long-term care facility (OR 1.03 [95% CI 1.00-1.07], p = 0.0467) and postoperative infection (OR 1.11 [95% CI 1.05-1.17], p = 0.0341) was observed in teaching hospitals in July compared with other months; however, incidence rates were similar regardless of admission month. Higher-risk patients (Charlson score ≥ 2) admitted to teaching hospitals in July had a similar likelihood of all outcomes regardless of admission month. Conclusions: This study of nationwide hospitalizations demonstrates that the influx of new residents and fellows in July has a negligible effect on periprocedural outcomes following spinal surgery.
    Journal of neurosurgery. Spine 01/2013; 18(3). DOI:10.3171/2012.12.SPINE12300 · 2.38 Impact Factor
Show more