Archdeacon Michael T, Simon Patrick M, Wyrick John D
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, P.O. Box 670212, 231 Albert Sabin Way, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0212, USA.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Dec;89(12):2625-31. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.01499.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate transfer patterns and insurance status for patients with a femoral fracture who were definitively managed within a six-hospital health-care system. We hypothesized that insurance status significantly influenced transfer of these patients to the level-I trauma center and that the level-I center provided definitive care for a disproportionate percentage of uninsured femoral fracture patients.
The present retrospective cohort study was performed within a six-hospital health-care system. The system comprises a single American College of Surgeons-designated level-I trauma center and five nondesignated community hospitals. We identified 243 patients with 251 femoral shaft fractures that had been definitively treated with intramedullary nail fixation within the system. From the health-care system billing database and trauma registries, we obtained diagnosis and procedure codes, insurance status, and trauma center transfer data. Differences in the proportions of uninsured and insured patients were calculated.
One hundred and seventy-two (71%) of the 243 patients who were definitively managed within our health-care system initially had been taken to the regional level-I center, and thirty-eight patients (16%) had been transferred to the trauma center. Of the thirty-eight patients who had been transferred, eighteen (47%) had met appropriate transfer criteria. Of the twenty patients with an isolated femoral fracture who had been transferred from hospitals with regular orthopaedic coverage, four (20%) had met appropriate transfer criteria. Twenty-two (58%) of the thirty-eight patients who had been transferred were uninsured, and all thirty-three patients who had not been transferred were insured (p = 0.0008); this observation remained when controlling for injury severity and available orthopaedic coverage (p < 0.0001). The proportion of insured patients definitively managed at the trauma center (52%) differed significantly from the proportion of insured patients definitively managed at the community hospitals (100%) (p < 0.0001).
The majority (71%) of the patients with a femoral fracture who had been managed definitively within our health-care system, regardless of injury severity, had been taken directly to the trauma center. This finding suggests over-triage, which errs on the side of patient well-being. Because there was a significant difference in insurance status between patients who had been transferred to the level-I center and those who had not been transferred as well as between patients who had been definitively managed at the level-I center and those who had been managed in community hospitals, it can be assumed that insurance status as well as injury severity and orthopaedic surgeon availability influence the decision to transfer femoral fracture patients to a level-I trauma center.
本研究的目的是评估在一个六家医院的医疗系统中接受确定性治疗的股骨骨折患者的转诊模式和保险状况。我们假设保险状况会显著影响这些患者向一级创伤中心的转诊,并且一级创伤中心为不成比例的 uninsured 股骨骨折患者提供确定性治疗。
本回顾性队列研究在一个六家医院的医疗系统内进行。该系统包括一家由美国外科医师学会指定的一级创伤中心和五家未指定的社区医院。我们确定了 243 例患有 251 个股骨干骨折且在该系统内接受髓内钉固定确定性治疗的患者。从医疗系统计费数据库和创伤登记处,我们获取了诊断和手术编码、保险状况以及创伤中心转诊数据。计算了 uninsured 和 insured 患者比例的差异。
在我们的医疗系统内接受确定性治疗的 243 例患者中,有 172 例(71%)最初被送往区域一级创伤中心,38 例(16%)被转诊至创伤中心。在被转诊的 38 例患者中,18 例(47%)符合适当的转诊标准。在从有常规骨科服务的医院转诊的 20 例单纯股骨骨折患者中,4 例(20%)符合适当的转诊标准。被转诊的 38 例患者中有 22 例(58%)是 uninsured,而所有未被转诊的 33 例患者都是 insured(p = 0.0008);在控制损伤严重程度和可用的骨科服务后,这一观察结果仍然成立(p < 0.0001)。在创伤中心接受确定性治疗的 insured 患者比例(52%)与在社区医院接受确定性治疗的 insured 患者比例(100%)有显著差异(p < 0.0001)。
在我们的医疗系统内接受确定性治疗的股骨骨折患者中,大多数(71%),无论损伤严重程度如何,都被直接送往创伤中心。这一发现表明存在过度分诊的情况,这是出于对患者福祉的考虑。由于被转诊至一级创伤中心的患者与未被转诊的患者之间以及在一级创伤中心接受确定性治疗的患者与在社区医院接受治疗的患者之间在保险状况上存在显著差异,可以假设保险状况以及损伤严重程度和骨科医生的可用性会影响将股骨骨折患者转诊至一级创伤中心的决定。