Treatment of Facial Fractures at a Level 1 Trauma Center: Do Medicaid and Non-Medicaid Enrollees Receive the Same Care?

Abstract

BackgroundTiming of surgical treatment of facial fractures may vary with the patient age, injury type, and presence of polytrauma. Previous studies using national data sets have suggested that trauma patients with government insurance experience fewer operations, longer length of hospital stay (LOS), and worse outcomes compared with privately insured patients. The objective of this study is to compare treatment of facial fractures in patients with and without Medicaid insurance (excluding Medicare). MethodsAll adults with mandibular, orbital, and midface fractures at a Level 1 Trauma Center between 2009 and 2018 were included. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the differences in the frequency of surgery, time to surgery (TTS), LOS, and mortality based on insurance type. ResultsThe sample included 1541 patients with facial fractures (mandible, midface, orbital), of whom 78.8% were male, and 13.1% (208) were enrolled in Medicaid. Mechanism of injury was predominantly assault for Medicaid enrollees and falls or motor vehicle accidents for non-Medicaid enrollees (P < 0.001). Patients with mandible and midface fractures underwent similar rates of surgical repair. Medicaid enrollees with orbital fractures underwent less frequent surgery for facial fractures (24.8% versus 34.7%, P = 0.0443) and had higher rates of alcohol and drug intoxication compared with non-Medicaid enrollees (42.8% versus 31.6%, P = 0.008). TTS, LOS, and mortality were similar in both groups with facial fractures. ConclusionsOverall, the treatment of facial fractures was similar regardless of the insurance type, but Medicaid enrollees with orbital fractures experienced less frequent surgery for facial fractures. Further studies are needed to identify specific socioeconomic and geographic factors contributing to these disparities in care.