Advertisement

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

, Volume 33, Issue 11, pp 1617–1625 | Cite as

Comparisons of the surgical outcomes and medical costs between transferred and directly admitted patients diagnosed with intestinal obstruction in an American tertiary referral center

  • Xian Hua Gao
  • Hanumant Chouhan
  • Emre Gorgun
  • Luca Stocchi
  • Gokhan Ozuner
Original Article
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Intestinal obstruction is a leading cause of patient mortality and the most common reason for emergent operation in colorectal surgery. The influence of inter-hospital transfer on patients’ outcomes varies greatly in different diseases. We aimed to compare the surgical outcomes and medical costs between transferred and directly admitted patients diagnosed with intestinal obstruction in an American tertiary referral center.

Methods

All intestinal obstruction patients operated in Cleveland Clinic from Jan 2012 to Dec 2016 were collected from a prospectively maintained database. Preoperative characteristics; surgical outcomes, including intraoperative complication, postoperative complication, readmission, reoperation, and postoperative 30-day mortality; and medical cost were collected. All parameters were compared between two groups before and after propensity score match. Multivariate logistic analysis was used to explore risk factors of surgical outcomes.

Results

A total of 576 patients were included, with 75 in the transferred group and 501 in the directly admitted group. Before match, the transferred patients had longer waiting interval from admission to surgery (p < 0.001), more contaminated or infected wounds (p = 0.02), different surgical procedures (p = 0.02), and similar surgical outcomes and total medical cost (all p > 0.05), compared with the directly admitted group. Multivariate analysis showed that inter-hospital transfer was not an independent predictor of any surgical outcome. After matching to balance the preoperative characteristics between two groups, no significant differences were identified in all surgical outcomes and total medical cost between two groups (all p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Compared with directly admitted patients, transferred intestinal obstruction patients are associated with similar surgical outcomes and similar medical costs.

Keywords

Intestinal obstruction Inter-hospital transfer Surgical outcomes Complication Medical cost 

Notes

Author contribution

Xian Hua Gao: data gathering and entry, statistical analysis, and manuscript preparation; Hanumant Chouhan: data gathering and manuscript preparation; Emre Gorgun and Luca Stocchi: critical review of manuscript; Gokhan Ozuner: concept, general supervision, and manuscript revisions.

Funding information

This study is funded in part by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (#81572332).

Compliance with ethical standards

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Cleveland Clinic.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Miller G, Boman J, Shrier I, Gordon PH (2000) Etiology of small bowel obstruction. Am J Surg 180(1):33–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hayanga AJ, Bass-Wilkins K, Bulkley GB (2005) Current management of small-bowel obstruction. Adv Surg 39:1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zielinski MD, Bannon MP (2011) Current management of small bowel obstruction. Adv Surg 45:1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Catena F, Di Saverio S, Coccolini F, Ansaloni L, De Simone B, Sartelli M, Van Goor H (2016) Adhesive small bowel adhesions obstruction: evolutions in diagnosis, management and prevention. World J Gastrointest Surg 8(3):222–231.  https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v8.i3.222 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bizer LS, Liebling RW, Delany HM, Gliedman ML (1981) Small bowel obstruction: the role of nonoperative treatment in simple intestinal obstruction and predictive criteria for strangulation obstruction. Surgery 89(4):407–413PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schraufnagel D, Rajaee S, Millham FH (2013) How many sunsets? Timing of surgery in adhesive small bowel obstruction: a study of the nationwide inpatient sample. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 74(1):181–187; discussion 187-189.  https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e31827891a1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Colonna AL, Byrge NR, Nelson SD, Nelson RE, Hunter MC, Nirula R (2016) Nonoperative management of adhesive small bowel obstruction: what is the break point? Am J Surg 212(6):1214–1221.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.09.037 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Teixeira PG, Karamanos E, Talving P, Inaba K, Lam L, Demetriades D (2013) Early operation is associated with a survival benefit for patients with adhesive bowel obstruction. Ann Surg 258(3):459–465.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182a1b100 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Malangoni MA, Times ML, Kozik D, Merlino JI (2001) Admitting service influences the outcomes of patients with small bowel obstruction. Surgery 130(4):706–711; discussion 711-703.  https://doi.org/10.1067/msy.2001.116918 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garwe T, Cowan LD, Neas B, Cathey T, Danford BC, Greenawalt P (2010) Survival benefit of transfer to tertiary trauma centers for major trauma patients initially presenting to nontertiary trauma centers. Acad Emerg Med Off J Soc Acad Emerg Med 17(11):1223–1232.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00918.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cassidy TJ, Edgar DW, Phillips M, Cameron P, Cleland H, Wood FM, Steering Committee of the ABRoA, New Z (2015) Transfer time to a specialist burn service and influence on burn mortality in Australia and New Zealand: a multi-centre, hospital based retrospective cohort study. Burns 41(4):735–741.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2015.01.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ilonzo N, Egorova NN, Nowygrod R (2016) Interhospital transfer for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 63(4):859–865.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2015.10.068 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mell MW, Wang NE, Morrison DE, Hernandez-Boussard T (2014) Interfacility transfer and mortality for patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 60(3):553–557.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2014.02.061 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rosenberg AL, Hofer TP, Strachan C, Watts CM, Hayward RA (2003) Accepting critically ill transfer patients: adverse effect on a referral center's outcome and benchmark measures. Ann Intern Med 138(11):882–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gordon HS, Rosenthal GE (1996) Impact of interhospital transfers on outcomes in an academic medical center. Implications for profiling hospital quality. Med Care 34(4):295–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sheridan R, Weber J, Prelack K, Petras L, Lydon M, Tompkins R (1999) Early burn center transfer shortens the length of hospitalization and reduces complications in children with serious burn injuries. J Burn Care Rehab 20(5):347–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alberts MJ, Wechsler LR, Jensen ME, Latchaw RE, Crocco TJ, George MG, Baranski J, Bass RR, Ruff RL, Huang J, Mancini B, Gregory T, Gress D, Emr M, Warren M, Walker MD (2013) Formation and function of acute stroke-ready hospitals within a stroke system of care recommendations from the brain attack coalition. Stroke 44(12):3382–3393.  https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002285 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Holmes JH (2008) Critical issues in burn care. J Burn Care Res 29(6 Suppl 2):S180–S187.  https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0b013e31818cf8b8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chow CJ, Gaertner WB, Jensen CC, Sklow B, Madoff RD, Kwaan MR (2017) Does hospital transfer impact outcomes after colorectal surgery? Dis Colon Rectum 60(2):194–201.  https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000765 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rosenbaum BP, Lorenz RR, Luther RB, Knowles-Ward L, Kelly DL, Weil RJ (2014) Improving and measuring inpatient documentation of medical care within the MS-DRG system: education, monitoring, and normalized case mix index. Perspect Health Inf Manag 11:1cPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kulshrestha A, Singh J (2016) Inter-hospital and intra-hospital patient transfer: recent concepts. Indian J Anaesth 60(7):451–457.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.186012 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Farto e Abreu P, Thomas B, Loureiro J, Roquette J, Ferreira R (2002) Inter-hospital transfer of critically-ill patients for urgent cardiac surgery after placement of an intra-aortic balloon pump. Rev Port Cardiol 21(10):1115–1123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lucas DJ, Ejaz A, Haut ER, Spolverato G, Haider AH, Pawlik TM (2014) Interhospital transfer and adverse outcomes after general surgery: implications for pay for performance. J Am Coll Surg 218(3):393–400.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.11.024 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Seror D, Feigin E, Szold A, Allweis TM, Carmon M, Nissan S, Freund HR (1993) How conservatively can postoperative small bowel obstruction be treated? Am J Surg 165(1):121–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bickell NA, Federman AD, Aufses AH Jr (2005) Influence of time on risk of bowel resection in complete small bowel obstruction. J Am Coll Surg 201(6):847–854.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.07.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kothari AN, Liles JL, Holmes CJ, Zapf MA, Blackwell RH, Kliethermes S, Kuo PC, Luchette FA (2015) “Right place at the right time” impacts outcomes for acute intestinal obstruction. Surgery 158(4):1116–1125.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2015.06.032 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Colorectal Surgery, Changhai HospitalNavy Military Medical UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Department of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute-A3The Cleveland Clinic FoundationClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations