We have located links that may give you full text access.
Predictive factors of 30-day unplanned readmission after lower extremity bypass.
Journal of Vascular Surgery 2013 April
BACKGROUND: Thirty-day unplanned readmission after lower extremity bypass represents a large cost burden and is a logical target for cost-containment strategies. We undertook this study to evaluate factors associated with unplanned readmission after lower extremity bypass.
METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis from a prospective institutional registry. All lower extremity bypasses for occlusive disease from January 1995 to July 2011 were included. The primary end point was 30-day unplanned readmission. Secondary end points included graft patency and limb salvage.
RESULTS: Of 1543 lower extremity bypasses performed, 84.5% were for critical limb ischemia and 15.5% were patients with intermittent claudication. Twenty-seven patients (1.7%) died in-house and were excluded from further analysis. Of 1516 lower extremity bypasses analyzed, 42 (2.8%) were in patients with a planned readmission within 30 days, and 349 (23.0%), in patients with an unplanned readmission. Most unplanned readmissions were wound related (62.9%). By multivariable analysis, preoperative predictive factors for unplanned readmission were dialysis dependence (odds ratio [OR], 1.73; P = .004), tissue loss indication (OR, 1.62; P = .0004), and history of congestive heart failure (OR, 1.43; P = .03). Postoperative predictors included distal inflow source (OR, 1.38; P = .016), in-hospital wound infection (OR, 8.30; P < .0001), in-hospital graft failure (OR, 3.20; P < .0001), and myocardial infarction (OR, 1.96; P < .04). Neither index length of stay nor discharge disposition independently predicted unplanned readmission. Unplanned readmission was associated with loss of assisted primary patency (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.80; P = .01) and long-term limb loss (hazard ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-2.29; P = .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Thirty-day unplanned readmission is a frequent occurrence after lower extremity bypass (23.0%). Stratifying patients by risk factors associated with unplanned readmission is essential for quality improvement and equitable resource allocation when disease-specific bundling strategies are being derived.
METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis from a prospective institutional registry. All lower extremity bypasses for occlusive disease from January 1995 to July 2011 were included. The primary end point was 30-day unplanned readmission. Secondary end points included graft patency and limb salvage.
RESULTS: Of 1543 lower extremity bypasses performed, 84.5% were for critical limb ischemia and 15.5% were patients with intermittent claudication. Twenty-seven patients (1.7%) died in-house and were excluded from further analysis. Of 1516 lower extremity bypasses analyzed, 42 (2.8%) were in patients with a planned readmission within 30 days, and 349 (23.0%), in patients with an unplanned readmission. Most unplanned readmissions were wound related (62.9%). By multivariable analysis, preoperative predictive factors for unplanned readmission were dialysis dependence (odds ratio [OR], 1.73; P = .004), tissue loss indication (OR, 1.62; P = .0004), and history of congestive heart failure (OR, 1.43; P = .03). Postoperative predictors included distal inflow source (OR, 1.38; P = .016), in-hospital wound infection (OR, 8.30; P < .0001), in-hospital graft failure (OR, 3.20; P < .0001), and myocardial infarction (OR, 1.96; P < .04). Neither index length of stay nor discharge disposition independently predicted unplanned readmission. Unplanned readmission was associated with loss of assisted primary patency (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.80; P = .01) and long-term limb loss (hazard ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-2.29; P = .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Thirty-day unplanned readmission is a frequent occurrence after lower extremity bypass (23.0%). Stratifying patients by risk factors associated with unplanned readmission is essential for quality improvement and equitable resource allocation when disease-specific bundling strategies are being derived.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app