Clark Nina M, Maine Rebecca G, Hantouli Mariam N, Cooper Ellen, Porter Alison, Sitlani Colleen M, Smith Nicholas L, Davidson Giana H
Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Surgery. 2025 Aug;184:109448. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2025.109448. Epub 2025 Jun 4.
Interfacility transfer for emergency general surgery is a key strategy for improving access to care. However, lower-intensity transfers are linked to increased costs, poor patient and family experience, and inefficient resource allocation. Clinical and health system characteristics associated with lower-intensity transfers among patients with emergency general surgery conditions remain unclear.
We performed a cohort study among adults with emergency general surgery conditions using claims data from Florida and California. Lower-intensity transfers were defined as admissions ≤3 days with discharge to home without procedural intervention. These were compared with greater-intensity transfers (admission >3 days, nonhome discharge, or procedural intervention), lower-intensity nontransfers, and higher-intensity nontransfers. We used multinomial logistic regression to identify patient and facility factors present on admission that were associated with lower-intensity transfer compared with other encounter types.
Of 211,466 patients who underwent emergency general surgery, lower-intensity transfers encompassed 0.7% of encounters overall and 30% of transfers. Factors associated with lower-intensity transfer compared with nontransfer included Medicaid insurance, history of bariatric surgery, patients presenting to a critical access hospital, patients with cholecystitis, and patients presenting with higher-complexity surgical disease. Patients presenting to hospitals with advanced gastroenterology and palliative care were less likely to undergo lower-intensity transfer (P < .05 for all).
Facility characteristics are associated with lower-intensity transfers among patients who undergo emergency general surgery and may be a future target for policy aimed at improving the efficiency and quality of regional emergency general surgery care. Understanding clinical and resource needs of patients who undergo emergency general surgery may facilitate the development of interventions to support emergency general surgery care in resource-limited settings and triage patients requiring high-complexity care to tertiary and quaternary facilities.
急诊普通外科的机构间转运是改善医疗服务可及性的关键策略。然而,低强度转运与成本增加、患者及家属体验不佳以及资源分配低效相关。急诊普通外科患者中与低强度转运相关的临床和卫生系统特征仍不明确。
我们利用来自佛罗里达州和加利福尼亚州的索赔数据,对患有急诊普通外科疾病的成年人进行了一项队列研究。低强度转运定义为住院时间≤3天且出院回家且未进行手术干预。将这些与高强度转运(住院时间>3天、非回家出院或手术干预)、低强度非转运和高强度非转运进行比较。我们使用多项逻辑回归来确定入院时存在的与其他就诊类型相比与低强度转运相关的患者和机构因素。
在211466例接受急诊普通外科手术的患者中,低强度转运占总就诊次数的0.7%,占转运次数的30%。与非转运相比,与低强度转运相关的因素包括医疗补助保险、减肥手术史、在基层医疗急救医院就诊的患者、胆囊炎患者以及患有复杂性更高的外科疾病的患者。在拥有先进胃肠病学和姑息治疗服务的医院就诊的患者进行低强度转运的可能性较小(所有P值均<0.05)。
机构特征与急诊普通外科患者的低强度转运相关,可能是未来旨在提高区域急诊普通外科护理效率和质量的政策目标。了解急诊普通外科患者的临床和资源需求可能有助于制定干预措施,以支持资源有限环境下的急诊普通外科护理,并将需要高复杂性护理的患者分诊到三级和四级医疗机构。