BACKGROUND
Major postoperative complications are associated with a substantial increase in hospital costs. Trauma patients are known to have a higher rate of complications than the general surgery population. We used the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) methodology to evaluate hospital costs, duration of stay, and payment associated with complications in trauma patients.
METHODS
Using NSQIP principles, patient data were collected for 512 adult patients admitted to the trauma service for > 24 hours at a Level 1 trauma center (2004-2005). Patients were placed in 1 of 3 groups: no complications (none), >or=1 minor complication (minor, eg, urinary tract infection), or >or=1 major complication (major, eg, pneumonia). Total hospital charges, costs, payment, and duration of stay associated with each complication group were determined from a cost-accounting database. Multiple regression was used to determine the costs of each type of complication after adjusting for differences in age, sex, new injury severity score, Glasgow coma scale score, maximum head abbreviated injury scale, and first emergency department systolic blood pressure.
RESULTS
A total of 330 (64%) patients had no complications, 53 (10%) had >or= 1 minor complication, and 129 (25%) had >or= 1 major complication. Median hospital charges increased from $33,833 (none) to $81,936 (minor) and $150,885 (major). The mean contribution to margin per day was similar for the no complication and minor complication groups ($994 vs $1,115, P = .7). Despite higher costs, the patients in the major complication group generated a higher mean contribution to margin per day compared to the no complication group ($2,168, P < .001). The attributable increase in median total hospital costs when adjusted for confounding variables was $19,915 for the minor complication group (P < .001), and $40,555 for the major complication group (P < .001).
CONCLUSION
Understanding the costs associated with traumatic injury provides a window for assessing the potential cost reductions associated with improved quality care. To optimize system benefits, payers and providers should develop integrated reimbursement methodologies that align incentives to provide quality care.
[1]
P. Pronovost,et al.
Cost reduction and quality improvement: it takes two to tango.
,
2000,
Critical care medicine.
[2]
S. Khuri.
Quality, advocacy, healthcare policy, and the surgeon.
,
2002,
The Annals of thoracic surgery.
[3]
Ernest E Moore,et al.
THE TWO-EVENT CONSTRUCT OF POSTINJURY MULTIPLE ORGAN FAILURE
,
2005,
Shock.
[4]
G. O’Keefe,et al.
The complications of trauma and their associated costs in a level I trauma center.
,
1997,
Archives of surgery.
[5]
E. Copeland.
Who Pays for Poor Surgical Quality? Building a Business Case for Quality Improvement
,
2007
.
[6]
E K Mensah,et al.
Distribution of variable vs fixed costs of hospital care.
,
1999,
JAMA.
[7]
W. Henderson,et al.
Hospital costs associated with surgical complications: a report from the private-sector National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.
,
2004,
Journal of the American College of Surgeons.
[8]
Bruce Springer,et al.
Easing the bottom-line impact of staffing shortages: a case study in shift bidding.
,
2006,
Healthcare financial management : journal of the Healthcare Financial Management Association.
[9]
W. Henderson,et al.
Detecting the blind spot: complications in the trauma registry and trauma quality improvement.
,
2007,
Surgery.
[10]
M. Pasquale.
Outcomes for trauma: is there an end (result) in sight?
,
2008,
The Journal of trauma.