Search

Objective: Recent initiatives to improve health care quality have focused attention on length of stay (LOS) and readmission rates for surgical patients, yet these two outcomes may be inversely related. This study was designed to elucidate the risk factors for both outcomes and to clarify the relationship between them in patients undergoing lower extremity bypass (LEB)., Methods: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) patients who underwent LEB were identified from the 2007-2010 California State Inpatient Database. LOS and risk factors were analyzed using Poisson regression. Risk factors for 30-day readmission were analyzed using logistic regression., Results: There were 6307 patients who underwent LEB, and 1291 (20%) were readmitted. The average index LOS was 8.3 days for those who were readmitted and 5.5 days for those who were not (P < .0001) and was an independent risk factor for 30-day readmission. The significant factors with the largest effect estimates for increased LOS reflected disease severity and postoperative complications: emergency department admission; advanced PAD; postoperative pneumonia, respiratory failure, urinary tract infection, wound/graft infection, graft complication, and discharge to a nursing facility. Independent predictors of readmission, other than LOS, reflected underlying patient factors: advanced PAD, chronic lung disease, diabetes, renal failure, postoperative congestive heart failure, and discharge status. Age, Medicaid or private insurance, and low income were protective. Of the 1291 readmissions, 453 (35%) were for definitive complications., Conclusions: In patients undergoing LEB, LOS is primarily associated with the occurrence of postoperative complications, whereas 30-day readmission is largely explained by underlying patient illness. Additionally, increased LOS is an independent risk factor for readmission. These findings suggest that efforts to reduce both LOS and readmission will be complementary. Furthermore, they support the notion that both LOS and 30-day readmission rates should be risk-adjusted., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) often undergo revascularization before amputation. The exact relationship between multiple procedures and increased risk of amputation is unclear. We sought to determine the increased risk of amputation for each additional revascularization., Methods: The 2007-2009 California State Inpatient Database (SID) was used to identify a cohort of CLI patients undergoing revascularization and conduct a time-to-event analysis for patients undergoing one or more revascularization procedures. One-year estimates were generated with Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank test. The Wei-Lin-Weissfeld (WLW) marginal proportional hazards model was used to assess independent effects of number of revascularization procedures on amputation and death., Results: A total of 11,190 patients with CLI underwent revascularization between July 2007 and December 2009. Their mean age was 71.0 years (interquartile range 62-80 years) and 6255 (55.9%) were male. Over half the subjects (55.2%) were smokers and there was a high burden of comorbidities in the cohort. One-year estimates of amputation by number of revascularizations (1: 23.3%; 2: 27.1%; 3: 30.3%; 4: 26.7%; 5(+): 28.6%; P < 0.001) and death (1: 18.7%; 2: 21.1%; 3: 26.3%; 4: 23.6%; 5+: 32.1%; P = 0.012) increased significantly as procedures increased. In the WLW model for amputation, the hazard increased significantly for patients with 2 revascularization versus 1 (HR = 1.22; 95% CI 1.09-1.37; P = 0.001) and 3 revascularizations versus 2 (HR = 1.33; 95% CI 1.10-1.62; P = 0.004). In the multivariable WLW models for death, the increase in revascularization procedures for 2 compared with 1 (HR = 1.18; 95% CI 1.04-1.34; P = 0.010) was significant., Conclusions: The risk of amputation increases with each additional revascularization procedure. These findings hold true for both percutaneous transluminal angioplasty only and lower extremity bypass only subsets. In addition, increased revascularization procedures appear to result in an increased risk of death. We advocate for continued communication between clinicians and patients on the true risks and benefits of additional revascularization procedures., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)