Fracasso Joseph L, Ahmed Nasim
Surgery, Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Jersey Shore University Medical Center, Neptune, New Jersey, USA.
Department of Surgery, Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, Nutley, New Jersey, USA.
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2024 Jul 4;9(1):e001436. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2024-001436. eCollection 2024.
Research indicates that specialized trauma centers, especially those of level I and II designation, can generate revenue if financial support is provided, and most importantly provide better outcomes for an injured patient by reducing length of stay and mortality when compared with treatment at hospitals without trauma center designation. Costs associated with trauma center operation have risen over the past few years in association with growing patient volumes and inflation. Documentation regarding costs for trauma center operations is sparse, and there exists a large variance between reported numbers based on their region. In most cases, the greatest proportion of funds are spent on clinical personnel while the smallest fraction is dedicated to educational and prevention programs. Studies confirm that as a product of these rising costs and a lack of state and federal funding that trauma centers remain uniquely financially vulnerable. Multiple strategies have been implemented to mitigate these costs but have proven insufficient. Legislations providing patients with expanded access to healthcare such as the Affordable Healthcare Act have failed to deliver on their intended purposes, and managed care organizations have moved to protect their own interest at the expense of trauma patient mortality. In lieu of concerted federal support, states and municipalities have explored solutions to support trauma centers such as small fees added to fines or encouraging charitable donations, although these programs have not seen ubiquitous implementation. Most trauma centers have begun incorporating activation costs to recoup losses from their low reimbursement rate, but these have continued to inflate, and pose a growing burden on vulnerable patients. Lack of funding from external sources such as state or federal appropriations poses a tangible threat to trauma centers for closure, and with multiple trauma centers acting as critical pillars of healthcare infrastructure for disadvantaged communities as well as the impact of this lack of funding being so broad and systemic, multiple 'trauma deserts' may emerge, leaving communities-especially disadvantaged communities which rely on the safety-net function of many high designation trauma centers-deprived of an essential treatment resource and increasing annual mortalities that could have otherwise been averted.
研究表明,如果能获得财政支持,专门的创伤中心,尤其是一级和二级创伤中心能够创收,最重要的是,与非创伤中心指定医院的治疗相比,创伤中心能通过缩短住院时间和降低死亡率,为受伤患者提供更好的治疗效果。在过去几年中,随着患者数量的增加和通货膨胀,创伤中心的运营成本有所上升。关于创伤中心运营成本的文件很少,而且根据地区不同,报告的数字之间存在很大差异。在大多数情况下,最大比例的资金用于临床人员,而最小比例的资金用于教育和预防项目。研究证实,由于这些成本的上升以及缺乏州和联邦资金,创伤中心在财务上仍然特别脆弱。已经实施了多种策略来降低这些成本,但事实证明并不充分。为患者提供更多医疗保健机会的立法,如《平价医疗法案》,未能实现其预期目标,而管理式医疗组织则以牺牲创伤患者的死亡率为代价来保护自身利益。由于缺乏协调一致的联邦支持,各州和市政府已经探索了支持创伤中心的解决方案,如在罚款中增加小额费用或鼓励慈善捐赠,尽管这些项目尚未得到普遍实施。大多数创伤中心已经开始纳入启动成本,以弥补低报销率造成的损失,但这些成本仍在不断膨胀,给弱势患者带来越来越大的负担。来自州或联邦拨款等外部来源的资金短缺,对创伤中心的关闭构成了切实威胁,而且由于多个创伤中心是弱势社区医疗基础设施的关键支柱,这种资金短缺的影响广泛而系统,可能会出现多个“创伤荒漠”,使社区——尤其是依赖许多高等级创伤中心安全网功能的弱势社区——失去一项重要的治疗资源,并增加原本可以避免的年度死亡率。