Transfer times and patient outcomes – A review of head injuries requiring surgery in Tasmania 2006–2017

Colgrave, Nevin; Ibbett, Imogen; Thani, Nova

doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2019.03.038

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is exemplified by a study from Albania that showed that implementing telemedicine reduced the incidence of unnecessary transfers [22]. Additionally, a large study from Tasmania, Australia, indicated that transfers to their tertiary referral center from peripheral hospitals were largely justifiable and that the patients did not fare worse than those who arrived at the tertiary center originally [23]. Needless to say, the factors that went into the success of these authors' health systems in preventing wasteful and harmful transfers from occurring are complex, that are indeed attainable.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Demographics and Outcomes of Interhospital Transfer Patients Undergoing Intracranial Tumor Resection: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Azizkhanian¹,

Matluck²,

Ogulnick³

et al. 2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionInterhospital transfer (IHT) contributes to increasing health care costs and typically accounts for increased patient morbidity and mortality compared to non-IHT patients. IHT inefficiencies leave patients vulnerable to delayed care and subsequent poor outcomes. In this study, we investigated factors influencing IHT of patients undergoing intracranial tumor resection (ITR), by comparing the variables distinguishing IHTs from non-IHT patients. MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective review comparing IHT and non-IHT patients undergoing ITR from 2016 to 2018. Study variables included age, sex, race, the Milan Complexity Scale (MCS) score, 11factor modified frailty index (mFI-11), length of stay (LOS), and Clavien-Dindo Score (CDS). Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to identify significant differences in these variables between groups, while variables predictive of transfer status were identified using binary logistic regression. ResultsData were collected from 219 patients undergoing ITR, with 80 (36.5%) IHT patients overall. The average age was 52 years (SD 18) and 57.7% were men. The MCS score was significantly higher in the IHT group (p = 0.014); however, mFI-11 was not (p = 0.322). The MCS score was predictive of IHT status in regression analysis (OR 1.17, p = 0.034). The IHT patients had a longer LOS (12 days vs 8 days, p = 0.014) with a lower CDS (p = 0.02). ConclusionThe transfer patients for intracranial tumor resection had a higher MCS score and thus comprised a more surgically challenging population compared to non-transfer patients. As expected, IHT patients had a longer LOS as they lived further from hospital by definition.

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%