Burn Center Verification and Safety Net Status: Are There Differences in Discharge to Inpatient Rehabilitation?

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Devi Lakhlani, Samantha Steeman, Eloise W Stanton, Clifford Sheckter
{"title":"Burn Center Verification and Safety Net Status: Are There Differences in Discharge to Inpatient Rehabilitation?","authors":"Devi Lakhlani, Samantha Steeman, Eloise W Stanton, Clifford Sheckter","doi":"10.1093/jbcr/irae113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Discharge to acute rehabilitation following a major burn injury is crucial for patient recovery and quality of life. However, barriers to acute rehabilitation, including race and payor type, impede access. The effect of burn center organizational structure on discharge disparities remains unknown. This study aims to investigate associations between patient demographics, burn center factors, and discharge to acute rehabilitation on a population level. Using the California Healthcare Access and Information Database, 2009-2019, all inpatient encounters at verified and non-verified burn centers were extracted. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients discharged to acute rehabilitation. Key covariates included age, race, burn center safety net status, diagnosis-related group, American Burn Association (ABA) verification status, and American College of Surgeons Level 1 trauma center designation. Logistic regression and mixed-effects modeling were performed, with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing. Among 27 496 encounters, 0.8% (228) were discharged to inpatient rehabilitation. By race/ethnicity, the proportion admitted to inpatient rehabilitation was 0.9% for White, 0.6% for Black, 0.7% for Hispanic, and 1% for Asian. After adjusting for burn severity and age, notable predictors for discharge to inpatient rehabilitation included Medicare as payor (OR 0.30-0.88, P = .015) compared to commercial insurance, trauma center status (OR 1.45-3.43, P < .001), ABA verification status (OR 1.16-2.74, P = .008), and safety net facility status (OR 1.09-1.97, P = .013). Discharge to inpatient rehabilitation varies by race, payor status, and individual burn center. Verified and safety net burn centers had more patients discharge to inpatient rehabilitation adjusted for burn severity and demographics.</p>","PeriodicalId":15205,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Burn Care & Research","volume":" ","pages":"294-302"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Burn Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irae113","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Discharge to acute rehabilitation following a major burn injury is crucial for patient recovery and quality of life. However, barriers to acute rehabilitation, including race and payor type, impede access. The effect of burn center organizational structure on discharge disparities remains unknown. This study aims to investigate associations between patient demographics, burn center factors, and discharge to acute rehabilitation on a population level. Using the California Healthcare Access and Information Database, 2009-2019, all inpatient encounters at verified and non-verified burn centers were extracted. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients discharged to acute rehabilitation. Key covariates included age, race, burn center safety net status, diagnosis-related group, American Burn Association (ABA) verification status, and American College of Surgeons Level 1 trauma center designation. Logistic regression and mixed-effects modeling were performed, with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing. Among 27 496 encounters, 0.8% (228) were discharged to inpatient rehabilitation. By race/ethnicity, the proportion admitted to inpatient rehabilitation was 0.9% for White, 0.6% for Black, 0.7% for Hispanic, and 1% for Asian. After adjusting for burn severity and age, notable predictors for discharge to inpatient rehabilitation included Medicare as payor (OR 0.30-0.88, P = .015) compared to commercial insurance, trauma center status (OR 1.45-3.43, P < .001), ABA verification status (OR 1.16-2.74, P = .008), and safety net facility status (OR 1.09-1.97, P = .013). Discharge to inpatient rehabilitation varies by race, payor status, and individual burn center. Verified and safety net burn centers had more patients discharge to inpatient rehabilitation adjusted for burn severity and demographics.

烧伤中心验证和安全网状态:出院到住院康复治疗是否存在差异?
重大烧伤后出院接受急性康复治疗对患者的康复和生活质量至关重要。然而,包括种族和付款人类型在内的急性康复障碍阻碍了患者的康复。烧伤中心的组织结构对出院差异的影响尚不清楚。本研究旨在调查患者人口统计学、烧伤中心因素和急性康复出院之间的关联。研究人员使用 2009-2019 年加利福尼亚州医疗保健访问和信息数据库,提取了所有在经过验证和未经验证的烧伤中心就诊的住院病人。主要结果是出院后接受急性康复治疗的患者比例。主要协变量包括年龄、种族、烧伤中心安全网状态、诊断相关组别、美国烧伤协会(ABA)验证状态和美国外科学院(ACS)1级创伤中心称号。我们进行了逻辑回归和混合效应建模,并对多重检验进行了 Bonferroni 调整。在 27,496 例患者中,0.8%(228 例)出院后接受了住院康复治疗。按种族/民族划分,白人住院康复的比例为 0.9%,黑人为 0.6%,西班牙裔为 0.7%,亚裔为 1%。在对烧伤严重程度和年龄进行调整后,与商业保险、创伤中心状况(OR 为 1.45-3.43,p=0.015)相比,住院康复出院的显著预测因素包括:医疗保险支付者(OR 为 0.30-0.88,p=0.015)、创伤中心状况(OR 为 1.45-3.43,p=0.015)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
21.40%
发文量
535
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Burn Care & Research provides the latest information on advances in burn prevention, research, education, delivery of acute care, and research to all members of the burn care team. As the official publication of the American Burn Association, this is the only U.S. journal devoted exclusively to the treatment and research of patients with burns. Original, peer-reviewed articles present the latest information on surgical procedures, acute care, reconstruction, burn prevention, and research and education. Other topics include physical therapy/occupational therapy, nutrition, current events in the evolving healthcare debate, and reports on the newest computer software for diagnostics and treatment. The Journal serves all burn care specialists, from physicians, nurses, and physical and occupational therapists to psychologists, counselors, and researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信