Division of Outcomes Research and Quality, Department of Surgery, Pennsylvania State University, College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania.
Division of Outcomes Research and Quality, Department of Surgery, Pennsylvania State University, College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania; Department of Health Policy and Administration, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania; Department of Public Health Sciences, College of Medicine, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, Pennsylvania.
J Surg Res. 2019 Mar;235:270-279. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.10.011. Epub 2018 Nov 1.
Because of the emergence of readmission-related Medicare penalties, efforts are being made to identify and reduce patient readmissions. The purpose of this study was to compare rates and risk factors for 30-d readmission and hospital length of stay (LOS) after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) among patients treated for carotid artery stenosis in Pennsylvania.
Data were from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4). We identified 15,966 patients who underwent CEA (n = 13,557) or CAS (n = 2409) in Pennsylvania between 2011 and 2014. Logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for 30-d readmission, whereas linear regression was used to model factors influencing LOS. Propensity score analysis was used to control for imbalanced covariates between procedures.
Thirty-day readmission rates in Pennsylvania after CEA and CAS for carotid artery stenosis were similar (9.8% and 9.6%, respectively; P = 0.794). Not home discharge destination, Charlson comorbidity index ≥2, and LOS >1 d were all significantly associated with readmission risk. Procedure type (CEA or CAS) did not significantly influence risk. A significant difference in LOS was found between CEA and CAS, but the magnitude of the difference was small (2.38 for CAS versus 2.59 for CEA; P = 0.007). Black race, urgent and emergent cases, and not home discharges significantly increased LOS by notable amounts (1, 1.5, 3.9, and 1.9 d, respectively).
Carotid artery stenosis patients in Pennsylvania undergoing CEA or CAS had similar 30-d readmission rates. Although LOS was significantly different, the magnitude of the difference was not large.
由于出现了与再入院相关的医疗保险处罚,人们正在努力识别和减少患者的再入院率。本研究的目的是比较宾夕法尼亚州接受颈动脉狭窄治疗的患者行颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)和颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)后 30 天再入院率和住院时间(LOS)的发生率和风险因素。
数据来自宾夕法尼亚州医疗保健成本控制委员会(PHC4)。我们确定了 2011 年至 2014 年期间在宾夕法尼亚州接受 CEA(n=13557)或 CAS(n=2409)治疗的 15966 名患者。使用逻辑回归确定 30 天再入院的风险因素,而使用线性回归来模拟影响 LOS 的因素。使用倾向评分分析来控制手术间不平衡的协变量。
宾夕法尼亚州 CEA 和 CAS 治疗颈动脉狭窄的 30 天再入院率相似(分别为 9.8%和 9.6%;P=0.794)。非家庭出院目的地、Charlson 合并症指数≥2 和 LOS>1 天均与再入院风险显著相关。手术类型(CEA 或 CAS)与风险无显著关系。CEA 和 CAS 的 LOS 存在显著差异,但差异幅度较小(CAS 为 2.38,CEA 为 2.59;P=0.007)。黑人种族、紧急和紧急情况以及非家庭出院显著增加了 LOS(分别为 1、1.5、3.9 和 1.9 天)。
宾夕法尼亚州接受 CEA 或 CAS 治疗的颈动脉狭窄患者的 30 天再入院率相似。尽管 LOS 存在显著差异,但差异幅度不大。