Search

Clear communication around surgical device use is crucial to patient safety. We evaluated the utility of the Device Briefing Tool (DBT) as an adjunct to the Surgical Safety Checklist.A nonrandomized, controlled pilot of the DBT was conducted with surgical teams at an academic referral center. Intervention departments used the DBT in all cases involving a surgical device for 10 wk. Utility, relative advantage, and implementation effectiveness were evaluated via surveys. Trained observers assessed adherence and team performance using the Oxford NOTECHS system.Of 113 individuals surveyed, 91 responded. Most respondents rated the DBT as moderately to extremely useful. Utility was greatest for complex devices (89%) and new devices (88%). Advantages included insight into the team's familiarity with devices (70%) and improved teamwork and communication (68%). Users found it unrealistic to review all device instructional materials (54%). Free text responses suggested that the DBT heightened awareness of deficiencies in device familiarity and training but lacked a clear mechanism to correct them. DBT adherence was 82%. NOTECHS scores in intervention departments improved over the course of the study but did not significantly differ from comparator departments.The DBT was rated highly by both surgeons and nurses. Adherence was high and we found no evidence of "checklist fatigue." Centers interested in implementing the DBT should focus on devices that are complex or new to any surgical team member. Guidance for correcting deficiencies identified by the DBT will be provided in future iterations of the tool.

The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist is a communication tool designed to improve surgical safety processes and enhance teamwork. It has been widely adopted since its introduction over ten years ago. As surgical safety needs evolve, organizations should periodically review and update their checklists. A holistic evaluation of the checklist in the context of an organization is the first step to making informed updates. In this article, we describe a comprehensive but feasible strategy for checklist evaluation which we developed and implemented as part of a surgical safety initiative in a high-performing center.A three-part evaluation plan was developed and carried out by a multidisciplinary team. The evaluation included assessment of 1. Quality of care through a review of surgical safety events; 2. Safety culture through a validated survey and informal feedback; and 3. Checklist performance through direct observations and a staff survey. To prepare for re-implementation the current institutional checklist was critically evaluated and a context assessment survey was administered to surgical staff.The evaluation revealed challenges in communication and teamwork, with surgical staff often perceived to be working in silos. The quality of care assessment indicated room for improvement in safety processes. Deficiencies in the safety culture measures of communication and feedback shed light on an overall lack of engagement with the checklist. Checklist performance demonstrated good adherence to the items on the checklist but limited engagement by the surgical team and minimal communication between subteams. These findings informed our revisions to the checklist and its implementation processes.We developed and implemented a comprehensive, scalable approach to checklist evaluation which directly informed improvements to the checklist that were tailored to the organization's current context. Organizations can apply this framework to breathe new life into their checklist and transform their safety culture.

Surgical devices are implicated in approximately 15% of intraoperative interruptions and 25% of errors. Device-related interruptions (DRIs) are therefore an important target for surgical quality improvement, but scalable measurement methodologies are lacking. The researchers therefore developed, pilot tested, and refined a simple tool for assessing intraoperative DRIs.Five DRI categories achieved face validity with frontline providers and surgical safety experts: improper/challenging assembly, device failure, loss of sterility, disconnection, and absent/wrong device. A data collection tool was created based on these categories as well as a free-text section to capture emergent DRI categories. After a brief training session, the tool was pilot tested by observers at a large academic referral center.In a sample of 210 operations, observers noted 66 DRIs across 39 cases. DRIs were most common in colorectal (38.0 per 100 cases), gynecologic (33.3 per 100 cases), and hepatopancreatobiliary surgery (32.1 per 100 cases). Device failure accounted for 30.3% of observed DRIs. Three emergent categories were identified: user unfamiliarity with the device (15.2%), video display malfunction (4.5%), and physical breakage of the device (1.5%).Measurement of DRIs by novice observers is a feasible and scalable approach to support quality improvement efforts focusing on surgical devices. This approach could provide actionable insights to improve device safety, such as informing educational and training programs, optimizing surgical tray composition, and improving the physical layout of the operating room.

The majority of cases of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) are thought to result from occult biliary disease. A growing body of evidence suggests that cholecystectomy for IAP reduces the risk of recurrence by up to two thirds. This study examined nationwide uptake and disparities in adoption of cholecystectomy for IAP.The National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify admissions for IAP between October 2015 and December 2018. Patients who underwent cholecystectomy before discharge and those that did not were compared using Wald χOf 62,305 estimated admissions for IAP, only 665 (1.1%) underwent cholecystectomy before discharge. Female sex, initiation of total parenteral nutrition (TPN), insurance status, and hospital type were associated with cholecystectomy on univariable analysis. On multivariable analysis, Hispanic patients (odds ration [OR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-2.56), patients on TPN (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.17-6.24), and those with private insurance (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.48-3.21 versus Medicare/Medicaid) were more likely to receive operations. Small hospitals and hospitals in rural areas were least likely to perform empiric cholecystectomies.Despite increasing evidence supporting cholecystectomy after IAP, the practice remains rare in the United States. Educational efforts and active implementation efforts are needed to promote adoption. Particular attention should be focused on small, rural centers and those that disproportionately care for uninsured patients and patients with public insurance.

Universal spinal immobilization has been the standard of prehospital trauma care since the 1960s. Selective immobilization has been shown to be safe and effective for emergency medical services use, but it is unclear whether such protocols reduce unnecessary and potentially harmful immobilization practices. This study evaluated the impact of a selective spinal immobilization protocol on practice patterns in a regional trauma system.All encounters for traumatic injury in the Tidewater Emergency Medical Services region from 2010 to 2016 were extracted from the Virginia Pre-Hospital Information Bridge. An interrupted time series analysis was used to assess practice change after system-wide protocol implementation in 2013. Intravenous access was used as a nonequivalent outcome measure in the absence of an appropriate control group.A total of 63,981 encounters were analyzed. At baseline, 16.7% of patients underwent full immobilization. The preprotocol slope was slightly positive (0.2% per month; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.2%). Slope and level changes after protocol implementation did not differ from those observed for intravenous access (-0.4% vs. -0.4% per month [ p = 0.4917] and -1.6% vs. -1.1% [ p = 0.1202], respectively). Cervical spinal immobilization became more common over the postimplementation period (0.1% per month; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.1%). Rates of immobilization for isolated penetrating trauma remained unchanged.Implementation of a selective spinal immobilization protocol did not reduce prehospital immobilization rates in a regional trauma system. Given the entrenched nature of immobilization practices, more intensive education and training strategies are needed. Efforts should prioritize eliminating immobilization for isolated penetrating trauma given its association with increased mortality.Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

OBJECTIVES The COVID-19 pandemic has forced a creative transition to virtual platforms due to physical distancing and travel restrictions. We designed and tested a highly scalable virtual training curriculum for novice raters using the Oxford NOTECHS non-technical skills rating system. DESIGN A three-day training course comprising virtual didactics, virtually facilitated simulations, and independent live observations was implemented. NOTECHS scores were submitted for eleven standardized video simulations and four live operations. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for total NOTECHS scores and subcomponent scores. Raters previously trained in-person with the same standardized videos served as a comparator group for equivalence testing. SETTING All study activities were conducted in a large academic tertiary referral center in Singapore as part of an ongoing surgical safety initiative. PARTICIPANTS Seven staff members underwent training (three virtually and four in-person). None had prior surgical experience or non-technical skills assessment training. RESULTS ICCs for total NOTECHS scores were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.73-0.98) for virtually trained raters and 0.83 for those trained in-person (95% CI, 0.68-0.99). Scores were equivalent between groups within a 10% margin. CONCLUSIONS Non-technical skills assessment can be reliably taught in a highly scalable virtual format. Virtual NOTECHS training is a valuable tool for educational and quality improvement initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic and for centers that lack ready access to onsite non-technical skills training expertise.

To ensure safe patient care, regulatory bodies worldwide have incorporated non-technical skills proficiency in core competencies for graduation from surgical residency. We describe normative data on non-technical skill ratings of surgical residents across training levels using the US-adapted Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS-US) assessment tool.We undertook an exploratory, prospective cohort study of 32 residents-interns (postgraduate year 1), junior residents (postgraduate years 2-3), and senior residents (postgraduate years 4-5)-across 3 US academic surgery residency programs. Faculty went through online training to rate residents, directly observed residents while operating together, then submitted NOTSS-US ratings on specific resident's intraoperative performance. Mean NOTSS-US ratings (total range 4-20, sum of category scores; situation awareness, decision-making, communication/teamwork, leadership each ranged 1-5, with 1=poor, 3=average, 5=excellent) were stratified by residents' training level and adjusted for resident-, rater-, and case-level variables, using mixed-effects linear regression.For 80 operations, the overall mean total NOTSS-US rating was 12.9 (standard deviation, 3.5). The adjusted mean total NOTSS-US rating was 16.0 for senior residents, 11.6 for junior residents, and 9.5 for interns. Adjusted differences for total NOTSS-US ratings were statistically significant across the following training levels: senior residents to interns (6.5; 95% confidence interval, 4.3-8.7; P.001), senior to junior residents (4.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.5-6.2; P.001), and junior residents to interns (2.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-3.9; P = .017). Differences in adjusted NOTSS-US ratings across residents' training levels persisted for individual NOTSS-US behavior categories.These data and online training materials can support US residency programs in determining competency-based performance milestones to develop surgical trainees' non-technical skills.

Objective To our knowledge, no curricula have been described for training novice, nonclinician raters of nontechnical skills in the operating room (OR). We aimed to report the reliability of Oxford Non-Technical Skills (NOTECHS) ratings provided by novice raters who underwent a scalable curriculum for learning to assess nontechnical skills of OR teams. Design In-person training course to apply the NOTECHS framework to assessing OR teams’ nontechnical skill performance, led by 2 facilitators and involving 5 partial-day sessions of didactic presentations, video simulation, and live OR observation with postassessment debriefing. NOTECHS ratings were submitted after each of 11 video scenarios and 8 live operations for the total NOTECHS team rating (including surgical/anesthesiology/nursing subteams) and for each NOTECHS skill category—situation awareness, problem solving and decision making, teamwork and cooperation, leadership and management. Inter-rater reliability was determined by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC, range 0-1). Setting Training for outcome measurement during a quality improvement initiative focused on surgical safety in 3 public hospitals in Singapore. Two trainings were conducted in May 2019 and January 2020. Participants Ten novice raters who were existing hospital staff and had overall minimal OR experience and no prior experience with nontechnical skill assessment. Results ICC for the total NOTECHS team rating was 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.91). ICCs for each NOTECHS category were as follows: situation awareness, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.78-0.88); problem solving and decision-making, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.70-0.83); teamwork and cooperation, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79-0.88); leadership and management, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.75-0.86). Conclusions This training curriculum for nontechnical skill assessments of OR teams was associated with high inter-rater reliability from novice raters with minimal collective OR experience. Using scalable training materials to produce reliable measurements of OR team performance, this nontechnical skills assessment curriculum may contribute to future QI projects aimed at improving surgical safety.

Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach. Methods Experts in aspects of management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1—Preoperative Care and Part 2—Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1. Results Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds. Conclusions These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.

Background Changes in care providers and hospitals after emergency general surgery (EGS) (care discontinuity) are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The cause of these worse outcomes is unknown. Our goal was to determine if hospital quality is associated with mortality after readmissions independent of continuity in care. Study Design This was a retrospective analysis of Medicare inpatient claims (2007 to 2015). All inpatients older than 65 years of age who underwent 1 of 7 EGS procedures shown to represent 80% of EGS volume, complications, and mortality nationally, were included. Care discontinuity was defined as readmission within 30 days to a nonindex hospital. Hospital quality was determined by hospital-level, risk-adjusted mortality rates by EGS procedure and categorized into high quality (HQ) and low quality (LQ). The primary outcome was overall mortality. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association of discontinuity and mortality. Results There were 882,929 EGS patients, 87,232 of whom were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. Care discontinuity was independently associated with mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.23; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.29). When readmitted patients were stratified by quality of index and readmitting hospital, mortality was associated with the quality of both the index hospital and the readmitting hospital. The highest mortality rate was observed in patients with index admission at low-quality hospitals and readmission to a different low-quality hospital. Conclusions Both care discontinuity and hospital quality are independently associated with mortality in EGS patients. These data support maintaining continuity of care, even at low performing hospitals.

Background Low hospital volume for emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures is associated with worse patient outcomes within the civilian health care system. The military maintains treatment facilities (MTFs) in remote locations to provide access to service members and their families. We sought to determine if patients treated at low-volume MTFs for EGS conditions experience worse outcomes compared with high-volume centers. Materials and methods We analyzed TRICARE data from 2006 to 2014. Patients were identified using an established coding algorithm for EGS admission. MTFs were divided into quartiles based on annual EGS volume. Outcomes included 30-d mortality, complications, and readmissions. Logistic regression models adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic differences in case-mix including EGS condition, surgical intervention, and comorbidities were used to determine the influence of hospital volume on outcomes. Results We identified 106,915 patients treated for an EGS condition at 79 MTFs. The overall mortality rate was 0.21%, with complications occurring in 8.55% and readmissions in 4.45%. After risk adjustment, lowest-volume MTFs did not demonstrate significantly higher odds of mortality (OR: 2.02, CI: 0.45-9.06) or readmissions (OR: 0.77, CI: 0.54-1.11) compared with the highest-volume centers. Lowest-volume facilities exhibited a lower likelihood of complications (OR: 0.76, CI: 0.59-0.98). Conclusions EGS patients treated at low-volume MTFs did not experience worse clinical outcomes when compared with high-volume centers. Remote MTFs appear to provide care for EGS conditions comparable with that of high-volume facilities. Our findings speak against the need to reduce services at small, critical access facilities within the military health care system.

Background Non-technical skills are critical to surgical safety. We examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-technical skills of operating room (OR) teams in Singapore. Materials and methods Observers rated live operations using the Oxford NOTECHS system. Pre- and post-COVID observations were captured from November 2019 to January 2020 and from January 2021 to February 2021, respectively. Scores were compared using Schuirmann's Two One-Sided Test procedure. Multivariable linear regression was used to adjust for case mix. A 10% margin of equivalence was set a priori. Results Observers rated 159 cases: 75 pre-COVID and 84 post-COVID. There were significant differences between groups in surgical department and surgeon-reported case complexity (both P

Outcomes of emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures on hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HST) recipients have not been defined in a large, national database. Whether EGS during HST engraftment admission, or in HST patients with graft versus host disease (GVHD) results in worse outcomes is unknown.The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was examined for patients with a history of BMT between 2001 and 2014.There were 520,000 HST admissions meeting inclusion criteria, of which, 14,143 (2.7%) required EGS. Of those requiring EGS, 378 (2.7%) were during engraftment admission and 13,765 (97.3%) on subsequent admission. For those requiring EGS during subsequent admission, 9,920 (72.1%) had a history of GVHD and 3,845 (27.9%) did not. On multivariate analysis, requirement of EGS was associated with mortality (OR: 1.71, 95%CI: 1.47-1.99, p 0.001). For patients requiring EGS, engraftment admission or GVHD was not associated with mortality.While EGS results in worse survival for the HST population, patients in their engraftment admission do not appear to be at increased mortality risk. In addition, GVHD does not worsen survival.

Adhesive small-bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common surgical condition accounting for a significant proportion of acute surgical admissions and surgeries. The implementation of a high-osmolar water-soluble contrast challenge has repeatedly been shown to reduce hospital length of stay and possibly the need for surgery in SBO patients. The effect of low-osmolar water-soluble contrast challenge however, is unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of an SBO pathway including a low-osmolar water-soluble contrast challenge.A prospective cohort of patients admitted for SBO were placed on an evidence-based SBO pathway including low-osmolar water-soluble contrast between January 2017 and October 2018 and were compared with a historical cohort of patients prior to the implementation of the pathway from September 2013 through December 2014. The primary outcome was length of stay less than 4 days with a secondary outcome of failure of nonoperative management.There were 140 patients enrolled in the SBO pathway during the study period and 101 historic controls. The SBO pathway was independently associated with a length of stay less than 4 days (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-3.00). Median length of stay for patients that were successfully managed nonoperatively was lower in the SBO pathway cohort compared with controls (3 days vs. 4 days, p = 0.04). Rates of readmission, surgery, and bowel resection were not significantly different between the two cohorts.Implementation of an SBO pathway using a low-osmolarity contrast is associated with decreased hospital length of stay. Rates of readmission, surgery, and need for bowel resection for those undergoing surgery were unchanged. An SBO pathway utilizing low-osmolarity water-soluble contrast is safe and effective in reducing length of stay in the nonoperative management of adhesive small-bowel obstructions.Therapeutic study, level IV.

Background Emergency general surgery (EGS) encompasses high-risk patients undergoing high-risk procedures. Admission source, particularly interhospital transfer, is rarely accounted for in clinical performance benchmarking. Our goal was to assess the impact of transfer status on outcomes after EGS. Study Design This was a retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons NSQIP database (2005 to 2014). All inpatients that underwent 1 of 7 EGS procedures shown to represent 80% of EGS volume, complications, and mortality nationally were included. Admission source was classified as directly admitted vs transferred from an outside emergency department or an acute care facility. The primary outcomes were overall mortality, overall morbidity, and major morbidity. A 3:1 propensity score matched analysis was used to determine the association of admission source with outcomes. Subgroup analysis was performed for high- and low-risk EGS procedures. Results A total of 222,519 EGS admissions were identified, of which 15,232 (6.8%) were transfers. Mean age was 46 years and 51.4% were female. Overall mortality was 3.1% for the entire cohort and 10.8% within the transfer group. After propensity score matched analysis for 33 clinical and demographic variables, transferred patients had higher rates of overall mortality (odds ratio 1.01; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.02), higher overall morbidity (odds ratio 1.07; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.09), and major morbidity (odds ratio 1.06; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.08) compared with directly admitted patients. Conclusions After rigorous risk adjustment, interhospital transfer status has a small effect on mortality and morbidity in the EGS population. This could suggest that it is reasonable to transfer patients and that regionalization of care should be encouraged.

Background: Racial and socioeconomic disparities are well documented in emergency general surgery (EGS) and have been highlighted as a national priority for surgical research. The aim of this study was to identify whether disparities in the EGS setting are more likely to be caused by major adverse events (MAEs) (e.g., venous thromboembolism) or failure to respond appropriately to such events. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was undertaken using administrative data. EGS cases were defined using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnostic codes recommended by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma. The data source was the National Inpatient Sample 2012-2013, which captured a 20%-stratified sample of discharges from all hospitals participating in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. The outcomes were MAEs, in-hospital mortality, and failure to rescue (FTR). Results: There were 1,345,199 individual patient records available within the National Inpatient Sample. There were 201,574 admissions (15.0%) complicated by an MAE, and 12,006 of these (6.0%) resulted in death. The FTR rate was therefore 6.0%. Uninsured patients had significantly higher odds of MAEs (adjusted odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.19), mortality (1.28, 1.16-1.41), and FTR (1.20, 1.06-1.36) than those with private insurance. Although black patients had significantly higher odds of MAEs (adjusted odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.16), they had lower mortality (0.95, 0.90-0.99) and FTR (0.86, 0.80-0.91) than white patients. Conclusions: Uninsured EGS patients are at increased risk of MAEs but also the failure of health care providers to respond effectively when such events occur. This suggests that MAEs and FTR are both potential targets for mitigating socioeconomic disparities in the setting of EGS.

Background Hospital-level variation has been found to influence outcomes in emergency general surgery. However, whether the individual surgeon plays a role in this variation is unknown. Methods We performed an analysis of the Florida State Inpatient Database (2010–2014), which is linked to the American Hospital Association's Annual Survey Database, including patients who emergently underwent 1 or more of 7 procedures (laparotomy, adhesiolysis, small bowel resection, colectomy, repair of a perforated gastric ulcer, appendectomy, or cholecystectomy). We used multilevel random effects modeling to quantify the amount of variation in mortality, complications, and 30-day readmissions attributable to surgeons. Patient clinical and demographic factors, as well as hospital-level factors, were introduced into the model in a forward stepwise fashion, and the percent of the variation attributable to surgeons was derived. Results Our study included 2,149 surgeons across 224 hospitals, with a total of 569,767 emergency general surgery cases. The overall unadjusted mortality rate was 3.8%, and the complication and readmission rates were 12.7% and 27.7%, respectively. Surgeon-level variation had the greatest impact on mortality, explaining 32.77% of the overall variability in mortality risk compared with 0.08% and 2.28% for complications and readmissions, respectively. Peptic ulcer disease operations were most susceptible to surgeon-level variation in mortality and readmissions, whereas appendectomies and cholecystectomies were least susceptible to surgeon-level variation for all outcomes. Conclusions Surgeon-level variation contributes to a significant portion of mortality in EGS. This variation is most pronounced in surgery for peptic ulcer disease, a high-risk, low-frequency surgical condition. Programs to reduce mortality in emergency general surgery should address reducing variability in practice with attention to high-risk, low-frequency procedures.

Background Nearly four million Americans present to hospitals with conditions requiring emergency general surgery annually, facing significant morbidity and mortality. Unlike elective surgery and trauma, there is no dedicated national quality improvement program to improve Emergency General Surgery (EGS) outcomes. Our objective is to estimate the number of excess deaths that could potentially be averted through EGS quality improvement in the United States. Methods Adults with the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-defined EGS diagnoses were identified in the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample 2006-2014. Hierarchical logistic regression was performed to benchmark treating hospitals into reliability adjusted mortality quintiles. Weighted generalized linear modeling was used to calculate the relative-risk of mortality at each hospital quintile, relative to best-performing quintile. We then calculated the number of excess deaths at each hospital quintile versus the best-performing quintile using techniques previously used to quantify potentially preventable trauma deaths. Results Twenty six million EGS patients were admitted and 6.5 million (25%) underwent an operation. In-hospital mortality varied from 0.3% to 4.1% across the treating hospitals. Relative to the best performing hospital quintile, an estimated 158,177 (153,509-162-736) excess EGS deaths occurred at lower-performing hospital quintiles. Overall, 47% of excess deaths occurred at the worst-performing hospitals, while 27% of all excess deaths occurred among the operative cohort.Conclusion:Nearly 200,000 excess EGS deaths occur across the US each decade. A national initiative to enable structures and processes-of-care associated with optimal EGS outcomes is urgently needed to achieve "Zero Preventable Deaths after Emergency General Surgery." Level of evidence III, epidemiological.

Importance In this aging society, older patients are more commonly undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS). Although frailty has been associated with worse outcomes in this population, EGS encompasses a heterogeneous mix of procedures. Objective To determine if the association of frailty with morbidity and mortality in EGS patients varies based on the level of procedural risk. Design, setting, and participants This cross-sectional study analyzed Medicare inpatient claims file (January 2007-December 2015) and included all inpatients who underwent 1 of 7 previously described EGS procedures shown to represent 80% of EGS volume, complications, and mortality nationally. Analysis took place from September 2019 to January 2020. Exposures The primary exposure of interest was risk procedural level. EGS procedures were stratified as high risk (excision of small intestine, excision of large intestine, peptic ulcer repair, lysis of peritoneal adhesions, and laparotomy) and low risk (appendectomy and cholecystectomy). Main outcomes and measures The primary outcome was overall 30-day mortality after discharge. Frailty was assessed using a claims-based frailty index. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used and was stratified by risk level. Results A total of 882 929 EGS patients were included in this study (mean [SD] age, 77.9 [7.5] years; 483 637 [54%] were female). Overall mortality was 4.5% (n = 40 304). The frailty index classified 12.6% (n = 111 513) of patients as frail, and mortality within this group was 9.9% (n = 11 307). High-risk procedures represented 53% (n = 468 098) of the caseload, and mortality was 6.8% (n = 31 979). For low-risk procedures, mortality was 2% (n = 8325). Frailty was significantly associated with mortality (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.60-1.68). After stratified analysis, this association remained significant for high-risk (odds ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.49-1.58) and low-risk (odds ratio, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.94-2.17) procedures. Conclusions and relevance Frailty was significantly associated with mortality in patients undergoing EGS, with an even greater association in low-risk procedures. Preoperative frailty assessment is imperative even in low-risk procedures.

Objective An electronic pathway for the management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) was built and implemented on top of the electronic health record. The aims of this study are to describe the development of the electronic pathway and to report early outcomes. Methods The electronic SBO pathway was designed and implemented at a single institution. All patients admitted to a surgical service with a diagnosis of adhesive SBO were enrolled. Outcomes were compared across three time periods: (1) patients not placed on either pathway from September 2013 through December 2014, (2) patients enrolled in the paper pathway from January 2017 through January 2018, and (3) patients enrolled in the electronic pathway from March through October 2018. The electronic SBO pathway pulls real-time data from the electronic health record to prepopulate the evidence-based algorithm. Outcomes measured included length of stay (LOS), time to surgery, readmission, surgery, and need for bowel resection. Comparative analyses were completed with Pearson's chi-squared, analysis of variance, and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Results There were 46 patients enrolled in the electronic pathway compared with 93 patients on the paper pathway, and 101 nonpathway patients. Median LOS was lower in both pathway cohorts compared with those not on either pathway (3 days [range 1–11] vs. 3 days [range 1–27] vs. 4 days [range 1–13], p = 0.04). Rates of readmission, surgery, time to surgery, and bowel resection were not significantly different across the three groups. Conclusion It is feasible to implement and utilize an electronic, evidence-based clinical pathway for adhesive SBOs. Use of the electronic and paper pathways was associated with decreased hospital LOS for patients with adhesive SBOs.

Trauma patients often require initial stabilization followed by transfer for ongoing trauma care. Thus, the administration of VTE prophylaxis is often delayed until admission to the receiving hospital. It is unclear if transfer status is a risk factor for VTE. The National Trauma Database v6.2 was used to identify patients admitted to Level I and II trauma centers. Exclusions included patients on anticoagulation

Background Emergency general surgery (EGS) is characterized by high rates of morbidity and mortality. Though checklists and associated communication-based huddle strategies have improved outcomes, these tools have never been specifically examined in EGS. We hypothesized that use of an evidence-based communication tool aimed to trigger intraoperative discussion could improve communication in the EGS operating room (OR). Materials and methods We designed a set of discussion prompts based on modifiable factors identified from previously published studies aimed to encourage all team members to speak up and to centralize awareness of patient disposition and intraoperative transfusion practices. This tool was pilot-tested using OR human patient simulators and was then rolled out to EGS ORs at an academic medical center. The perceived effect of our tool's implementation was evaluated through mixed-methodologic presurvey and postsurvey analysis. Results Preimplementation and postimplementation survey-based data revealed that providers reported the EGS-focused discussion prompts as improving team communication in EGS. A trend toward shared awareness of intraoperative events was observed; however, nurses described cultural impedance of discussion initiation. Providers described a need for further reinforcement of the tool and its indications during implementation. Conclusions Use of a discussion-based communication tool is perceived as supporting team communication in the EGS OR and led to a trend toward improving a shared understanding of intraoperative events. Analyses suggest the need for enhanced reinforcement of use during implementation and improvement of team-based education regarding EGS. Furthermore work is needed to understand the full impact of this evidence-based tool on OR team dynamics and EGS patient outcomes.

Objective The objective of our study was to characterize providers' impressions of factors contributing to disproportionate rates of morbidity and mortality in emergency general surgery to identify targets for care quality improvement. Background Emergency general surgery is characterized by a high-cost burden and disproportionate morbidity and mortality. Factors contributing to these observed disparities are not comprehensively understood and targets for quality improvement have not been formally developed. Methods Using a grounded theory approach, emergency general surgery providers were recruited through purposive-criterion–based sampling to participate in semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Participants were asked to identify contributors to emergency general surgery outcomes, to define effective care for EGS patients, and to describe operating room team structure. Interviews were performed to thematic saturation. Transcripts were iteratively coded and analyzed within and across cases to identify emergent themes. Member checking was performed to establish credibility of the findings. Results A total of 40 participants from 5 academic hospitals participated in either individual interviews (n = 25 [9 anesthesia, 12 surgery, 4 nursing]) or focus groups (n = 2 [15 nursing]). Emergency general surgery was characterized by an exceptionally high level of variability, which can be subcategorized as patient-variability (acute physiology and comorbidities) and system-variability (operating room resources and workforce). Multidisciplinary communication is identified as a modifier to variability in emergency general surgery; however, nursing is often left out of early communication exchanges. Conclusion Critical variability in emergency general surgery may impact outcomes. Patient-variability and system-variability, with focus on multidisciplinary communication, represent potential domains for quality improvement in this field.

BACKGROUND Patients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures are up to eight times more likely to die than patients undergoing the same procedures electively. This excess mortality is often attributed to nonmodifiable patient factors including comorbidities and physiologic derangements at presentation, leaving few targets for quality improvement. Although the hospital-level traits that contribute to EGS outcomes are not well understood, we hypothesized that facilities with lower trauma mortality would have lower EGS mortality. METHODS Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2008-2011), we calculated hospital-level risk-adjusted trauma mortality rates for hospitals with more than 400 trauma admissions. We then calculated hospital-level risk-adjusted EGS mortality rates for hospitals with more than 200 urgent/emergent admissions for seven core EGS procedures (laparotomy, large bowel resection, small bowel resection, lysis of adhesions, operative intervention for ulcer disease, cholecystectomy, and appendectomy). We used univariable and multivariable techniques to assess for associations between hospital-level risk-adjusted EGS mortality and hospital characteristics, patient-mix traits, EGS volume, and trauma mortality quartile. RESULTS Data from 303 hospitals, representing 153,544 admissions, revealed a median hospital-level EGS mortality rate of 1.21% (interquartile range, 0.86%-1.71%). After adjusting for hospital traits, hospital-level EGS mortality was significantly associated with trauma mortality quartile as well as patients' community income-level and race/ethnicity (p < 0.05 for all). Mean risk-adjusted EGS mortality was 1.09% (95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.25%) at hospitals in the lowest quartile for risk-adjusted trauma mortality, and 1.64% (95% confidence interval, 1.48-1.80%) at hospitals in the highest quartile of trauma mortality (p < 0.01). Sensitivity analyses limited to (1) high-mortality procedures and (2) high-volume facilities; both found similar trends (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Patients at hospitals with lower risk-adjusted trauma mortality have a nearly 33% lower risk of mortality after admission for EGS procedures. The structures and processes that improve trauma mortality may also improve EGS mortality. Emergency general surgery-specific systems measures and process measures are needed to better understand drivers of variation in quality of EGS outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Epidemiological, level III; Care management, level IV.

Emergency General Surgery (EGS) patients represent a unique group of acutely ill surgical patients at high risk for death and complications. Since the inception of EGS as a surgical subspecialty in the early 2000s, there have been significant developments to further define the scope of EGS as well as to advance data collection, performance measurement, and quality improvement. This includes defining the EGS cohort by diagnosis and procedure and by overall burden, benchmarking of EGS outcomes, and creation of quality improvement programs aimed at reducing the excess morbidity and mortality associated with EGS. Going forward there exists a need for a more modern approach to quality improvement. This may include the creation of an EGS data registry, the use of electronic medical records data, wearable device technology, and a focus on patient reported outcomes.

Objectives: Following calls from the National Institutes of Health and American College of Surgeons for “urgently needed” research, the objectives of the present study were to (1) ascertain whether differences in 30/90/180-day mortality, major morbidity, and unplanned readmissions exist among adult (18–64 yr) and older adult (≥65 yr) emergency general surgery (EGS) patients; (2) vary by diagnostic category; and (3) are explained by variations in insurance, income, teaching status, hospital EGS volume, and a hospital's proportion of minority patients. Background: Racial/ethnic disparities have been described in in-hospital and 30-day settings. How longer-term outcomes compare—a critical consideration for the lived experience of patients—has, however, only been limitedly considered. Methods: Survival analysis of 2007 to 2011 California State Inpatient Database using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: A total of 737,092 adults and 552,845 older adults were included. In both cohorts, significant differences in 30/90/180-day mortality, major morbidity, and unplanned readmissions were found, pointing to persistently worse outcomes between non-Hispanic Black and White patients [180-d readmission hazard ratio (95% confidence interval):1.04 (1.03–1.06)] and paradoxically better outcomes among Hispanic adults [0.85 (0.84–0.86)] that were not encountered among Hispanic older adults [1.06 (1.04–1.07)]. Stratified results demonstrated robust morbidity and readmission trends between non-Hispanic Black and White patients for the majority of diagnostic categories, whereas variations in insurance/income/teaching status/EGS volume/proportion of minority patients all significantly altered the effect—combined accounting for up to 80% of risk-adjusted differences between racial/ethnic groups. Conclusions: Racial/ethnic disparities exist in longer-term outcomes of EGS patients and are, in part, determined by differences in factors associated with emergency care. Efforts such as these are needed to understand the interplay of influences—both in-hospital and during the equally critical, postacute phase—that underlie disparities’ occurrence among surgical patients.

This review explores ongoing efforts to document the global burden of surgical disease. The chapter recaps the theoretical basis for surgical disease burden measurement. It then focuses on the indirect and direct epidemiology of surgical disease throughout the world, with a particular focus on global and low- and middle-income country (LMIC) work. This review will focus on the results of peer-reviewed publications concerning surgical burden epidemiology from the last 5 years. It will demonstrate the multiple attempts to define which surgical conditions should be treated to meet high unmet needs for surgical care. It will also describe the results of modeling, field epidemiology, and alternate methods for assessing global, regional, and country burdens of surgical disease. Many people in the LMICs live without access to sufficient surgical care. Research from the past 5 years has begun to define this unmet need.

Accurate risk estimation is essential when benchmarking surgical outcomes for reimbursement and engaging in shared decision-making. The greater complexity of emergency surgery patients may bias outcome comparisons between elective and emergency cases.To test whether an established risk modelling tool, the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) predicts mortality comparably for emergency and elective cases.From the ACS-NSQIP 2011-2012 patient user files, we selected core emergency surgical cases also common to elective scenarios (gastrointestinal, vascular, and hepato-biliary-pancreatic). After matching strategy for Common Procedure Terminology (CPT) and year, we compared the accuracy of ACS-NSQIP predicted mortality probabilities using the observed-to-expected ratio (O:E), c-statistic, and Brier score.In all, 56,942 emergency and 136,311 elective patients were identified as having a common CPT and year. Using a 1:1 matched sample of 37,154 emergency and elective patients, the O:E ratios generated by ACS-NSQIP models differ significantly between the emergency [O:E = 1.031; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.028-1.033] and elective populations (O:E = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.77-0.80, P0.0001) and the c-statistics differed significantly (emergency c-statistic = 0.927; 95% CI = 0.921-0.932 and elective c-statistic = 0.887; 95% CI = 0.861-0.912, P = 0.003). The Brier score, tested across a range of mortality rates, did not differ significantly for samples with mortality rates of 6.5% and 9% (eg, emergency Brier score = 0.058; 95% CI = 0.048-0.069 versus elective Brier score = 0.057; 95% CI = 0.044-0.07, P = 0.87, among 2217 patients with 6.5% mortality). When the mortality rate was low (1.7%), Brier scores differed significantly (emergency 0.034; 95% CI = 0.027-0.041 versus elective 0.016; 95% CI = 0.009-0.023, P value for difference 0.0005).ACS-NSQIP risk estimates used for benchmarking and shared decision-making appear to differ between emergency and elective populations.

Emergency operations are associated with worse outcomes than elective operations. If not repaired electively, ventral hernias are at risk of strangulating and requiring emergency repair. We sought to identify patient- and hospital-level factors associated with emergency ventral hernia repair in a nationally representative, United States sample.We abstracted data from the 2003-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample for adults (≥18 years) who underwent inpatient ventral hernia repair. Our primary outcome was emergency repair. We assessed differences in patient- and hospital-level factors as possible predictors of emergency repair using multivariable logistic regression. We examined secondary outcomes (mortality, total hospital cost, duration of stay) using multivariable logistic and generalized linear (family gamma; link log) regression.After weighting to the United States population, we included 453,161 adults (39.5% emergency). Independent predictors of emergency repair included payer status (uninsured: odds ratio 3.50, [3.10, 3.96]; Medicaid: 1.29 [1.20, 1.39] compared with private insurance), race/ethnicity (black: 1.77 [1.64, 1.92]; Hispanic: 1.44 [1.28, 1.61] compared with white), age (≥85 years: 2.23 [2.00, 2.47] compared with45 years), and comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥3: 1.68 [1.56, 1.80] compared with 0). After risk-adjustment, emergency repair was associated with greater odds of in-hospital death, greater costs, and longer hospital stay.Inpatient ventral hernia repairs are frequently performed emergently, with worse outcomes in this group. Independent predictors of emergency repair include factors that may limit access to and/or selection for an elective operation. These predictors provide targets for interventions to improve access to elective care and inform patient selection with the goal of improving patient outcomes.

Background Resilience, or the ability to cope with difficulties, influences an individual's response to life events including unexpected injury. We sought to assess the relationship between patient self-reported resilience traits and functional and psychosocial outcomes 6 months after traumatic injury. Methods Adult trauma patients 18 years to 64 years of age with moderate to severe injuries (Injury Severity Score, ≥9) admitted to one of three Level I trauma centers between 2015 and 2017 were contacted by phone at 6 months postinjury and asked to complete a validated Trauma Quality of Life (T-QoL) survey and PTSD screen. Patients were classified into "low" and "high" resilience categories. Long-term outcomes were compared between groups. Adjusted logistic regression models were built to determine the association between resilience and each of the long-term outcomes. Results A total of 305 patients completed the 6-month interview. Two hundred four (67%) of the 305 patients were classified as having low resilience. Mean age was 42 ± 14 years, 65% were male, 91% suffering a blunt injury, and average Injury Severity Score was 15.4 ± 7.9. Patients in the low-resilience group had significantly higher odds of functional limitations in activities of daily living (odds ratio [OR], 4.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.48-9.34). In addition, patients in the lower resilience group were less likely to have returned to work/school (OR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.71-6.19), more likely to report chronic pain (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.54-4.30) and more likely to screen positive for PTSD (OR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.58-5.54). Conclusion Patients with low resilience demonstrated worse functional and psychosocial outcomes 6 months after injury. These data suggest that screening for resilience and developing and deploying early interventions to improve resilience-associated traits as soon as possible after injury may hold promise for improving important long-term functional outcomes. Level of evidence Prognostic, level II.

Emergency general surgery (EGS) accounts for more than 2 million U.S. hospital admissions annually. Low-income EGS patients have higher rates of postoperative adverse events (AEs) than high-income patients. This may be related to health care segregation (a disparity in access to high-quality centers). The emergent nature of EGS conditions and the limited number of EGS providers in rural areas may result in less health care segregation and thereby less variability in EGS outcomes in rural areas. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of income on AEs for both rural and urban EGS patients.The National Inpatient Sample (2007-2014) was queried for patients receiving one of 10 common EGS procedures. Multivariate regression models stratified by income quartiles in urban and rural cohorts adjusting for sociodemographic, clinical, and other hospital-based factors were used to determine the rates of surgical AEs (mortality, complications, and failure to rescue [FTR]).1,687,088 EGS patients were identified; 16.60% (n = 280,034) of them were rural. In the urban cohort, lower income quartiles were associated with higher odds of AEs (mortality OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.15-1.27], complications, 1.07 [1.06-1.09]; FTR, 1.17 [1.10-1.24] P 0.001). In the rural context, income quartiles were not associated with the higher odds of AE (mortality OR, 1.14 [0.83-1.55], P = 0.42; complications, 1.06 [0.97-1,16], P = 1.17; FTR, 1.12 [0.79-1.59], P = 0.52).Lower income is associated with higher postoperative AEs in the urban setting but not in a rural environment. This socioeconomic disparity in EGS outcomes in urban settings may reflect health care segregation, a differential access to high-quality health care for low-income patients.

Lower socioeconomic status (SES) is known to be associated with higher morbidity and mortality following injury. However, the impact of individual SES on long-term outcomes after trauma is unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of educational level and income on long-term outcomes after injury.Trauma patients with moderate to severe injuries admitted to three Level-I trauma centers were contacted 6 months to 12 months after injury to evaluate functional status, return to work/school, chronic pain, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Lower SES status was determined by educational level and income. Adjusted logistic regression models were built to determine the association between educational level and income (lowest vs. highest quartile determined by census-tract area) on each of the long-term outcomes. A sensitivity analysis was performed using the national median household income ($57,617) as threshold for defining low versus high income.A total of 1,516 patients were followed during a 36-month period. Forty-nine percent had a low educational level, and 26% were categorized in the low-income group. Mean (SD) age and injury severity score were 60 (21.5) and 14.3 (7.3), respectively, with most patients (94%) having blunt injuries. After adjusting for confounders, low educational level was associated with poor long-term outcomes: functional limitation [odds ratio (OR), 1.78 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.41-2.26)], has not yet returned to work/school [OR, 2.48 (95% CI, 1.70-3.62)], chronic pain [OR, 1.63 (95% CI, 1.27-2.10)], and PTSD [OR, 2.23 (95% CI, 1.60-3.11)]. Similarly, low-income level was associated with not yet return to work/school [OR, 1.97 (95% CI, 1.09-3.56)], chronic pain [OR,1.70 (95% CI, 1.14-2.53)], and PTSD [OR, 2.20 (95% CI, 1.21-3.98)]. In sensitivity analyses, there were no significant differences in long-term outcomes between income levels.Low educational level is strongly associated with worse long-term outcomes after injury. However, although household income is associated with long-term outcomes, it matters where the threshold is. The impact of different socioeconomic measures on long-term outcomes after trauma cannot be assumed to be interchangeable.Prognostic and epidemiological, level III.

The rapid diagnosis and treatment of a patient with an emergent surgical pathology is critical to their outcome and survival. The choice of radiologic tests, interpretation of the images, and clinical correlation of the results are essential factors for the timely recognition of life-threatening situations. The myriad causes of abdominal pain require a detailed history, physical exam, laboratory tests, and the correct imaging modality for accurate treatment. In the clinical setting, concerns from the surgical team conveyed to the radiologist should reflect the differential diagnoses so that the radiologist can tailor the imaging modality to best evaluate those suspicions. Thus, depending on the problem suspected by the physician, the radiologic test can be appropriate, evidence-based, cost-effective, and at the greatest risk/benefit ratio to the patient. It is important to note that only after initial resuscitation and clinical stabilization should confirming a diagnosis via radiology be completed. Immediate operative intervention should supersede imaging if time does not allow for radiologic adjuncts. In the following section, the modalities of radiologic investigation for common emergency general surgery pathologies will be outlined and described.

Background Introducing new surgical devices into the operating room (OR) can serve as a critical opportunity to address patient safety. The effectiveness of OR briefings to improve communication, teamwork, and safety has not been evaluated in this setting. Methods Ariadne Labs and Johnson and Johnson (J&J) collaborated to develop and assess an intervention including a Device Briefing Tool (DBT) and novel multidisciplinary team training for clinicians (surgeons and nurses) around the introduction of a new device in the OR. J&J sales representatives trained clinicians to use the DBT, a communication tool to improve patient safety when a new device is used for the first time. Surveys were administered to representatives (n = 10), surgeons (n = 15), and nurses (n = 30) at the baseline, after trainings, and after using the DBT in an operation at six different Thai hospitals. Results Familiarity with the Surgical Safety Checklist (SURGICAL SAFETY CHECKLIST) varied but increased post-training. Regarding trainings, 90% of representatives felt they very much or completely met all learning objectives but 50% felt only slightly prepared to train clinicians on using DBT. Post-training, clinician confidence in using a new device rose from 47 to 85%. Regarding the DBT, 90% of clinicians felt confident using it and reported they were very likely to use it in the future. Overall, over 90% of all clinicians and representatives felt safe having surgery in their hospitals. Conclusions There is high acceptability and feasibility of the multidisciplinary trainings and the DBT among representatives and clinicians, albeit in a limited number of participants from a small number of institutions.

Background Designated trauma centers improve outcomes for severely injured patients. However, major trauma workload can disrupt other care pathways and some patient groups may compete ineffectively for resources with higher priority trauma cases. This study tested the hypothesis that treatment at a higher-level trauma center is an independent predictor for worse outcome after appendectomy. Methods An observational study was undertaken using an all-payer longitudinal data set (California State Inpatient Database 2007–2011). All patients with an ICD-90-CM diagnosis of “acute appendicitis” (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code 540) that subsequently underwent appendectomy were included. Patients transferred between hospitals were excluded to minimize selection bias. The outcome measures were days to the operating room, length of stay, unplanned 30-d readmission (to any hospital in California), and in-hospital mortality. Logistic and generalized linear regression models were used to adjust for patient- (age, sex, payer status, race, Charlson comorbidity index, weekend admission, and generalized peritonitis) and hospital-level (teaching status and bed size) factors. Results There were 119,601 patients treated in 278 individual hospitals. Patients in level I trauma centers (L1TCs) reached the operating room later (predicted mean difference 0.25 d [95% confidence interval 0.14–0.36]), stayed in hospital longer (0.83 d [0.36–1.31]), and had higher adjusted odds of generalized peritonitis (odds ratio 1.63 [95% confidence interval 1.13–2.36]) than those in nontrauma centers. There were no differences in mortality or unplanned 30-d readmissions to hospital; or between level II trauma centers and nontrauma centers across any of the measured outcomes. Conclusions Odds of generalized peritonitis are higher and hospital length of stay is longer in L1TCs, although we found no evidence that patients come to serious harm in such institutions. Further work is necessary to determine whether pressure for resources in L1TCs can explain these findings.

The purpose of this investigation was to delineate whether elderly patients with spinal injuries benefit from transfers to higher level trauma centers.Retrospective review of the National Trauma Data Bank 2007 to 2011, including patients65 (y) with any spinal fracture and/or spinal cord injury from a blunt mechanism. Patients who were transferred to level I and II centers from other facilities were compared to those admitted and received their definitive treatment at level III or other centers.Of 3,313,117 eligible patients, 43,637 (1.3%) met inclusion criteria: 19,588 (44.9%) were transferred to level I-II centers, and 24,049 (55.1%) received definitive treatment at level III or other centers. Most of the patients (95.8%) had a spinal fracture without a spinal cord injury. Transferred patients were more likely to require an intensive care unit admission (48.5% versus 36.0%, P0.001) and ventilatory support (16.1% versus 13.3%, P0.001). Mortality for the entire cohort was 7.7% (8.6% versus 7.1%, P0.001) and significantly higher, at 21.7% for patients with a spinal cord injury (22.3% versus 21.0%, P0.001). After adjusting for all available covariates, there was no difference in the adjusted mortality between patients transferred to higher level centers and those treated at lower level centers (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.05 [0.95-1.17], P = 0.325).Transfer of elderly patients with spinal injuries to higher level trauma centers is not associated with improved survival. Future studies should explore the justifications used for these transfers and focus on other outcome measures such as functional status to determine the potential benefit from such practices.