Interhospital Transfer Research Articles

Time to ECG diagnosis delays inter-hospital transfer to revascularization in STEMI patients presenting to a regional emergency department: a five-year audit

BackgroundReducing the door-to-balloon time (D2BT) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients maximizes myocardial salvage and mitigates morbidity/mortality.AimsTo assess the D2BT in STEMI patients requiring inter-hospital transfer for revascularization and identify any potential causes of delay.MethodsConsecutive patients presenting to the Connolly Hospital Blanchardstown (CHB) emergency department (ED) who were transferred to the Mater Misericordiae University Hospital in Dublin for primary percutaneous coronary intervention from January 2018 to October 2022 were identified in a regional database and their D2BTs calculated. D2BTs were further sub-categorized into key intervals to identify any potential causes of delay.ResultsA total of 90 patients were included for analysis, with a median D2BT of 117.5 min (interquartile range [IQR]: 99.3–170.8 min) and 52.5% of patients achieving the ≤ 120 min target. Despite being the shortest interval considered, the time from arrival at the CHB ED to diagnostic electrocardiogram (ECG) was a substantial contributor to the overall delay to revascularization given its wide variability (median: 18.0 min; IQR: 9.0–46.8 min), with only 28.8% of patients achieving the ≤ 10 min target.ConclusionsNearly half of the patients studied failed to achieve the overall target D2BT for revascularization. The time from arrival at the CHB ED to diagnostic ECG was identified as a substantial contributor to this failure, with a median time almost twice that of the target and a quarter of all patients spending longer than 46.8 min. These findings highlight a need to improve the implementation of ECG triage and interpretation in the ED.

Analysis of onset-to-door time and its influencing factors in Chinese patients with acute ischemic stroke during the 2020 COVID-19 epidemic: a preliminary, prospective, multicenter study

BackgroundPre-hospital delay in China is a serious issue with unclear relevant reasons, seriously impeding the adoption of appropriate measures. Herein, we analyzed the onset-to-door time (ODT) in Chinese patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and its influencing factors.MethodsWe prospectively recruited 3,459 patients with AIS from nine representative tertiary general hospitals in China between January and June 2022. Patients were divided into ODT ≤ 3 h and ODT > 3 h groups. Following single-factor analysis, binary logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the risk factors leading to pre-hospital delay.ResultsIn total, 763 (21.83%) patients arrived at the hospital within 3 h of onset. After adjusting for confounding factors, the risk factors for ODT were residence in rural areas (odds ratio [OR]: 1.478, 95% credibility interval [CI]: 1.024–2.146) and hospital transfer (OR: 7.479, 95% CI: 2.548–32.337). The protective factors for ODT were location of onset ≤ 20 km from the first-visit hospital (OR: 0.355, 95% CI: 0.236–0.530), transportation by emergency medical services (OR: 0.346, 95% CI: 0.216–0.555), history of atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.375, 95% CI: 0.207–0.679), moderate stroke (OR: 0.644, 95% CI: 0.462–0.901), and severe stroke (OR: 0.506, 95% CI: 0.285–0.908).ConclusionsMost patients with AIS fail to reach a hospital within the critical 3-h window. The following measures are recommended to reduce pre-hospital delays: reasonable distribution of hospitals accessible to nearby residents, minimizing interhospital transfer, paying attention to patients with mild stroke, and encouraging patients to use ambulance services. Pre-hospital delays for patients can be reduced by implementing these measures, ultimately improving the timeliness of treatment and enhancing patient prognosis. This study was carried out amid the COVID-19 pandemic, which presented challenges and constraints.

Predicting Mortality Prior to Interhospital Hospital for "Unseen" General Surgery Patients: Development, Validation and Feasibility Trial of a Mortality Risk Calculator.

Develop and validate a mortality risk calculator that could be utilized at the time of transfer, leveraging routinely collected variables that could be obtained by trained non-clinical transfer personnel. There are no objective tools to predict mortality at the time of inter-hospital transfer for Emergency General Surgery (EGS) patients that are "unseen" by the accepting system. Patients transferred to general or colorectal surgery services from January 2016 through August 2022 were retrospectively identified and randomly divided into training and validation cohorts (3:1 ratio). The primary outcome was admission-related mortality, defined as death during the index admission or within 30 days post-discharge. Multiple predictive models were developed and validated. Among 4,664 transferred patients, 280 (6.0%) experienced mortality. Predictive models were generated utilizing 19 routinely collected variables; the penalized regression model was selected over other models due to excellent performance using only 12 variables. The model performance on the validating set resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and balanced accuracy of 0.851, 0.90, 0.67, and 0.79, respectively. After bias correction, Brier score was 0.04, indicating a strong association between the assigned risk and the observed frequency of mortality. A risk calculator using twelve variables has excellent predictive ability for mortality at the time of interhospital transfer among "unseen" EGS patients. Quantifying a patient's mortality risk at the time of transfer could improve patient triage, bed and resource allocation, and standardize care.

Procedural Results and Long-term Outcome of Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in a UK Non-surgical Centre.

Chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has evolved a great deal over recent years, with increased procedural success and lower complication rates being reported. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility, safety and success of a dedicated CTO programme in a large UK PCI centre without on-site cardiothoracic surgery facilities. Clinical and procedural data were retrospectively collected for consecutive unselected patients undergoing CTO PCI between 2015 and 2019 from the local database and regional electronic patient records. In-hospital outcomes and long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, MI, stroke and target vessel revascularisation) were recorded. A total of 170 patients underwent 191 CTO procedures during the study period. The mean age was 63 ± 10 years and 80.6% of patients were male (n=137). The clinical indications were: stable chronic coronary syndromes in 88.5% (n=169) of patients; staged procedures in the context of acute coronary syndromes in 1.6% (n=3); and presentation with acute coronary syndrome in 9.9% (n=19). The procedural success rate was 50.0% (n=25) for general interventional cardiologists and 90.1% (n=127) for dedicated CTO operators. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events occurred once (0.5%) and interhospital transfer for emergency salvage cardiac surgery was not required. Long-term follow-up data at a median duration of 3.8 years revealed 4 (2.4%) cardiac deaths, 14 (8.3%) spontaneous MI events and 10 (5.9%) target vessel revascularisations. These data suggest CTO PCI using contemporary techniques is both safe and effective when undertaken in a high-volume non-surgical centre by experienced operators.

Optimizing Interhospital Transfers in Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery: Challenges, Insights, and Proposals for Standardized Care in Germany.

Germany's high density of under-equipped hospitals and anticipated surge in orthopedic and trauma surgery-related diseases by 2030, combined with personnel shortages, are expected to increase patient transfers between hospitals, an issue that urgently needs standardized protocols. Despite some existing cooperative agreements, such as between joint-replacement centers or within the Trauma Network DGU®, these measures do not adequately address the full range of patient-transfer cases, including those due to a lack of specialization or staff shortages, resulting in delayed treatment and potential health risks. This study aims to dissect the intricacies of interhospital transfers in orthopedics and trauma surgery across Germany, focusing on understanding the underlying reasons for transfers, comparing the operational structures of small and large hospitals, and laying the groundwork for future standardized protocols to enhance patient care. A cross-sectional study was conducted in the form of an online survey via SoSci Survey, which was directed at orthopedic surgeons and trauma surgeons working in hospitals in Germany. The 22-question survey gathered information on participants' clinic roles, departmental details, transfer processes, frequent diagnoses, perceptions of transfer quality, and improvement areas. The survey was sent to orthopedic and trauma surgeons in Germany by the specialist society. The data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics to ensure a comprehensive insight into interhospital transfer practices. The study involved 152 participants from various hospital ranks and located in different hospital sizes and types across rural and urban areas. A significant difference was observed between the care structures of basic/regular care and central/maximum care hospitals, especially regarding the available facilities and specialties. These findings suggest improvements such as better patient documentation, increased digital communication, optimized patient distribution, and standardization of transfer requests, among others. This study highlights the urgent need for improved protocols and resource allocation to eliminate inequalities in transfers between hospitals in orthopedics and trauma surgery in Germany.

Patient and Facility Characteristics Associated with Early Mortality After Interhospital Transfer

Patient and Facility Characteristics Associated with Early Mortality After Interhospital Transfer

Interhospital Transfer Versus other Modes of Admission of Patients with Covid-19 at the University Hospital Andohatapenaka: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Interhospital Transfer Versus other Modes of Admission of Patients with Covid-19 at the University Hospital Andohatapenaka: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Impact of interhospital transfer status on outcomes of variceal and nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: insights from the National Inpatient Sample analysis, 2017 to 2020

Background Variceal and nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (VUGIB and NVUGIB, respectively) require prompt intervention. Existing studies offer limited insight into the impact of interhospital transfers on patients with VUGIB and NVUGIB. Methods We conducted a retrospective study using the US National Inpatient Sample database from 2017 to 2020. The outcomes included in-hospital mortality, incidence of complications, procedural performance, and resource utilization. Results A total of 28,275 VUGIB and 781,370 NVUGIB adult patients were included. Transferred VUGIB and NVUGIB patients, when compared to nontransferred ones, demonstrated higher inpatient mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.49 and 1.86, P < 0.05). Patients with VUGIB and NVUGIB had a higher likelihood of acute kidney injury requiring dialysis (AOR 3.79 and 1.76, respectively, P = 0.01), vasopressor requirement (AOR 2.13 and 2.37, respectively, P < 0.01), need for mechanical ventilation (AOR 1.73 and 2.02, respectively, P < 0.01), and intensive care unit admission (AOR 1.76 and 2.01, respectively, P < 0.01). Compared to their nontransferred counterparts, transferred VUGIB patients had a higher rate of undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (AOR 3.26, 95% CI 1.92–5.54, P < 0.01), while transferred NVUGIB patients had a higher rate of interventional radiology-guided embolization (AOR 2.01, 95% CI 1.73–2.34, P < 0.01) and endoscopic hemostasis (AOR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05–1.15, P < 0.01). Conclusion Interhospital transfer is associated with worse clinical outcomes and higher resource utilization for VUGIB and NVUGIB patients.

Clinical change during inter-hospital transfer for thrombectomy: Incidence, associated factors, and relationship with outcome.

Patients with acute ischemic stroke with a large vessel occlusion (LVO) admitted to non endovascular-capable centers often require inter-hospital transfer for thrombectomy. We aimed to describe the incidence of substantial clinical change during transfer, the factors associated with clinical change, and its relationship with 3-month outcome. We analyzed data from two cohorts of acute stroke patients transferred for thrombectomy to a comprehensive center (Stanford, USA, November 2019 to January 2023; Montpellier, France, January 2015 to January 2017), regardless of whether thrombectomy was eventually attempted. Patients were included if they had evidence of an LVO at the referring hospital and had a National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score documented before and immediately after transfer. Inter-hospital clinical change was categorized as improvement (⩾4 points and ⩾25% decrease between the NIHSS score in the referring hospital and upon comprehensive center arrival), deterioration (⩾4 points and ⩾25% increase), or stability (neither improvement nor deterioration). The stable group was considered as the reference and was compared to the improvement or deterioration groups separately. A total of 504 patients were included, of whom 22% experienced inter-hospital improvement, 14% deterioration, and 64% were stable. Pre-transfer variables independently associated with clinical improvement were intravenous thrombolysis use, more distal occlusions, and lower serum glucose; variables associated with deterioration included more proximal occlusions and higher serum glucose. On post-transfer imaging, clinical improvement was associated with arterial recanalization and smaller infarct growth and deterioration with larger infarct growth. As compared to stable patients, those with clinical improvement had better 3-month functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio (cOR) = 2.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.59-3.71; p < 0.001), while those with deterioration had worse outcome (adjusted cOR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.37-0.98; p = 0.044). Substantial inter-hospital clinical changes are frequently observed in LVO-related ischemic strokes, with significant impact on functional outcome. There is a need to develop treatments that improves the clinical status during transfer. The data that support the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request.

Association of Interhospital Transfer With Outcomes of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Contemporary Analysis.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has emerged as a life-sustaining measure for individuals with end-stage cardiopulmonary derangements. An estimated one-third of patients must be transferred to a specialized center to receive this intervention. Therefore, the present study sought to characterize the impact of interhospital transfer (IHT) status on outcomes following ECMO. The 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify all adult (≥18 years) hospitalizations for ECMO. Patients were stratified based on transfer status from another acute care hospital. Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the association between transfer status and outcomes of interest. Patient and operative factors associated with IHT were identified using regression. Of an estimated 61,180 hospitalizations entailing ECMO, 21,410 (35.0%) were transfers. Annual transfer volume doubled over the study period, from 2915 to 5945 (nptrend < .001). The predicted morality risk of non-transfers decreased between 2016 and 2020 but remained similar in transferred patients. Following adjustment, transfer was associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality, complications, duration of stay, and hospitalization costs. Patients experiencing transfer were less likely to be of black race and private insurance status. Despite increasing transfer volume and utilization of ECMO, IHT was associated with significant mortality and hospital complication risks. Further work to reduce adverse outcomes, resource burden, and socioeconomic differences within IHT may improve accessibility to this life-saving modality.

Expanding urological services into regional Australia and reducing interhospital transfers: how the nurse practitioner can help.

A visiting urology service has been in existence at Hamilton Base Hospital, Western Victoria, over the past 25 years, serving an unmet need. A Urology Nurse Practitioner (UNP) provides the care and management of urology patients working in close association with visiting urologists. We aim to assess the impact of the UNP's role in the delivery of regional urological care. A retrospective analysis of medical records identified all clinical interventions by the UNP between January 2016 and December 2019. Each encounter was graded according to a clinical severity scale from grade 1 to 5 and assessed for UNP management of patients and the prevention of interhospital transfers. One hundred eighty-four patients with 654 individual assessments were identified for inclusion and classified according to the adapted clinical severity scale. Most interventions for category 3 and 4 patients related to major bleeding, catheter difficulties, and haemodynamic instability. A total of 19 patients whose urological issues would typically require interhospital transfer were able to be managed locally. Transferring an acute patient from a regional to a tertiary hospital for specialist care is often necessary but not ideal for the patient and their family. The presence of a dedicated UNP in a regional centre is important for patient care and has an important role in preventing unnecessary transfers. This is a vital component of a visiting urological service to a rural community.

The shock index predicts in-flight blood transfusion in aeromedical trauma patients.

To define the utility of the Triage Revised Trauma Score (TRTS), GCS/Age/arterial Pressure (GAP) score, and shock index (SI) in predicting the need for in-flight blood product administration in civilian trauma patients transported by an aeromedical platform. A retrospective chart review of 3582 aeromedical trauma cases was conducted. An initial TRTS, GAP score and SI were calculated for each patient, and the administration of in-flight blood products was also recorded. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to quantify the predictive discrimination of the TRTS, GAP score and SI on the need for in-flight blood product administration. The SI showed a superior predictive value compared to the TRTS and GAP score. The SI showed an area under the curve on the ROC curve of 0.85 in both primary and inter-hospital transfer cases, indicating reasonable predictive value. The SI demonstrates favourable test characteristics for predicting the need for in-flight blood product administration. Prospective validation of these results is warranted.

Large vessel occlusive stroke with milder baseline severity shows better collaterals and reduced harm from thrombectomy transfer delays.

Patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke presenting with milder baseline clinical severity are common and require endovascular thrombectomy. However, such patients are difficult to recognize using pre-hospital severity-based triage tools and therefore are likely to require a secondary inter-hospital transfer if transported to a non-thrombectomy center. Given the potential for milder severity to represent better underlying cerebrovascular collateral circulation, it is unknown whether transfer delays are still associated with poorer post-stroke outcomes in this patient group. We primarily aimed to examine whether the harmful effect of inter-hospital transfer delay for thrombectomy was different for LVO patients with mild or severe deficits. Secondarily, we also investigated whether imaging markers of collateral circulation were different between severity groups. Registry data from two large Australian thrombectomy centers were used to identify all directly presenting and secondarily transferred LVO patients undergoing thrombectomy, divided into those with lower (NIHSS < 10) and higher (NIHSS ⩾ 10) baseline deficits. The primary outcome was the functional independence or return to baseline defined as modified Rankin Scale 0-2 or baseline at 90 days. Patients with complete baseline CT-perfusion data were analyzed for imaging markers of collateral circulation by baseline severity group. A total of 1210 LVO patients undergoing thrombectomy were included, of which 273 (22.6%) had lower baseline severity. Despite similar thrombolysis and recanalization rates, transferred patients had lower odds of achieving the primary outcome compared to the primary presentation to a thrombectomy center, where baseline severity was higher (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.759 (95% CI 0.576-0.999)), but not when severity was lower (aOR 1.357 (95% CI 0.764-2.409), p-interaction = 0.122). In the imaging analysis of 436 patients, those with milder severity showed smaller median ischemic core volumes (12.6 (IQR 0.0-17.9) vs 27.5 (IQR 6.5-37.1) mL, p < 0.001)), higher median perfusion mismatch ratio (10.8 (IQR 4.8-54.5) vs 6.6 (IQR 3.5-16.5), p < 0.001), and lower median hypoperfusion intensity ratio (0.25 (IQR 0.18-0.38) vs 0.40 (IQR 0.22-0.57), p < 0.001). Patients receiving secondary inter-hospital transfer for thrombectomy had poorer outcomes compared to those presenting directly to a thrombectomy center if baseline deficits were severe, but this difference was not observed when baseline deficits were milder. This result may potentially be due to our secondary findings of significantly improved collateral circulation markers in lower-severity LVO patients. As such, failure of pre-hospital screening tools to detect lower-severity LVO patients for pre-hospital bypass to a thrombectomy center may not necessarily deleteriously affect outcome. Anonymized data not published within this article will be made available on request from any qualified investigator.

Impact of Interhospital Transfer on Patients Undergoing Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke from a Comprehensive Stroke Center (P3-5.026)

Impact of Interhospital Transfer on Patients Undergoing Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke from a Comprehensive Stroke Center (P3-5.026)

Short Stay Hospitalizations Following Interhospital Transfer for Acute Stroke (P7-5.006)

Short Stay Hospitalizations Following Interhospital Transfer for Acute Stroke (P7-5.006)

Mechanical Thrombectomy Outcomes for Tele-stroke Inter-hospital Transfers vs. Direct Admit Patients (P9-5.019)

Mechanical Thrombectomy Outcomes for Tele-stroke Inter-hospital Transfers vs. Direct Admit Patients (P9-5.019)

Interhospital Transfer for Emergency General Surgery: A Contemporary National Analysis.

Patients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) often require complex management and transfer to higher acuity facilities, especially given increasing national efforts aimed at centralizing care. We sought to characterize factors and evaluate outcomes associated with interhospital transfer using a contemporary national cohort. All adult hospitalizations for EGS (appendectomy, cholecystectomy, laparotomy, lysis of adhesions, small/large bowel resection, and perforated ulcer repair) ≤2days of admission were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients initially admitted to a different institution and transferred to the operating hospital comprised the Transfer cohort (others: Non-Transfer). Multivariable models were developed to consider the association of Transfer with outcomes of interest. Of ∼1653169 patients, 107945 (6.5%) were considered the Transfer cohort. The proportion of patients experiencing interhospital transfer increased from 5.2% to 7.7% (2016-2020, P < .001). On average, Transfer was older, more commonly of White race, and of a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index. After adjustment, increasing age, living in a rural area, receiving care in the Midwest, and decreasing income quartile were associated with greater odds of interhospital transfer. Following risk adjustment, Transfer remained linked with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.64, CI 1.49-1.80), as well as any perioperative complication (AOR 1.33, CI 1.27-1.38; Reference: Non-Transfer). Additionally, Transfer was associated with significantly longer duration of hospitalization (β + 1.04days, CI + .91-1.17) and greater costs (β+$3,490, CI + 2840-4140). While incidence of interhospital transfer for EGS is increasing, transfer patients face greater morbidity and resource utilization. Novel interventions are needed to optimize patient selection and improve post-transfer outcomes.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on interhospital transfer of patients with major trauma in Korea: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundInterhospital transfer (IHT) is necessary for providing ultimate care in the current emergency care system, particularly for patients with severe trauma. However, studies on IHT during the pandemic were limited. Furthermore, evidence on the effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on IHT among patients with major trauma was lacking.MethodThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in an urban trauma center (TC) of a tertiary academic affiliated hospital in Daegu, Korea. The COVID-19 period was defined as from February 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021, whereas the pre-COVID-19 period was defined as the same duration of preceding span. Clinical data collected in each period were compared. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted IHT.ResultsA total of 2,100 individual patients were included for analysis. During the pandemic, the total number of IHTs decreased from 1,317 to 783 (− 40.5%). Patients were younger (median age, 63 [45–77] vs. 61[44–74] years, p = 0.038), and occupational injury was significantly higher during the pandemic (11.6% vs. 15.7%, p = 0.025). The trauma team activation (TTA) ratio was higher during the pandemic both on major trauma (57.3% vs. 69.6%, p = 0.006) and the total patient cohort (22.2% vs. 30.5%, p < 0.001). In the COVID-19 period, duration from incidence to the TC was longer (218 [158–480] vs. 263[180–674] minutes, p = 0.021), and secondary transfer was lower (2.5% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.025).ConclusionWe observed that the total number of IHTs to the TC was reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, TTA was more frequent, particularly among patients with major trauma. Patients with severe injury experienced longer duration from incident to the TC and lesser secondary transfer from the TC during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Network analysis of stroke systems of care in Korea

BackgroundThe landscape of stroke care has shifted from stand-alone hospitals to cooperative networks among hospitals. Despite the importance of these networks, limited information exists on their characteristics and functional attributes.MethodsWe...

Period of hospitalization and mortality in transferred versus non-transferred COVID-19 patients: results from Germany

COVID-19 was a challenge for health-care systems worldwide, causing large numbers of hospitalizations and inter-hospital transfers. We studied whether transfer, as well as its reason, was associated with the duration of hospitalization in non-ICU and ICU patients. For this purpose, all patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 between August 1st and December 31st, 2021, in a network of hospitals in Southern Germany were comprehensively characterized regarding their clinical course, therapy, complications, transfers, reasons for transfer, involved levels of care, total period of hospitalization and in-hospital mortality, using univariate and multiple regression analyses. While mortality was not significantly associated with transfer, the period of hospitalization was. In non-ICU patients (n = 545), median (quartiles) time was 7.0 (4.0–11.0) in non-transferred (n = 458) and 18.0 (11.0–29.0) days in transferred (n = 87) patients (p < 0.001). In ICU patients (n = 100 transferred, n = 115 non-transferred) it was 12.0 (8.3–18.0) and 22.0 (15.0–34.0) days (p < 0.001). Beyond ECMO therapy (4.5%), reasons for transfer were medical (33.2%) or capacity (61.9%) reasons, with medical/capacity reasons in 32/49 of non-ICU and 21/74 of ICU patients. Thus, the transfer of COVID-19 patients between hospitals was associated with longer periods of hospitalization, corresponding to greater health care utilization, for which specific patient characteristics and clinical decisions played a role.