Objective

Subdural hematoma (SDH), a form of traumatic brain injury, is a common disease that requires extensive patient management and resource utilization; however, there remains a paucity of national studies examining the likelihood of readmission in this patient population. The aim of this study is to investigate differences in 30- and 90-day readmissions for treatment of traumatic SDH using a nationwide readmission database.

Methods

The Nationwide Readmission Database years 2013-2015 were queried. Patients with a diagnosis of traumatic SDH and a primary procedure code for incision of cerebral meninges for drainage were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification coding system. Patients were grouped by no readmission (Non-R), readmission within 30 days (30-R), and readmission within 31-90 days (90-R).

Results

We identified a total of 14,355 patients, with 3106 (21.6%) patients encountering a readmission (30-R: n = 2193 [15.3%]; 90-R: n = 913 [6.3%]; Non-R: n = 11,249). The most prevalent 30- and 90-day diagnoses seen among the readmitted cohorts were postoperative infection (30-R: 10.5%, 90-R: 13.0%) and epilepsy (30-R: 3.7%, 90-R: 1.1%). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, Medicare, Medicaid, hypertension, diabetes, renal failure, congestive heart failure, and coagulopathy were independently associated with 30-day readmission; Medicare and rheumatoid arthritis/collagen vascular disease were independently associated with 90-day readmission.

Conclusions

In this study, we determine the relationship between readmission rates and complications associated with surgical intervention for traumatic subdural hematoma.

Background

As of May 4, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected >3.5 million people and touched every inhabited continent. Accordingly, it has stressed health systems worldwide, leading to the cancellation of elective surgical cases and discussions regarding health care resource rationing. It is expected that rationing of surgical resources will continue even after the pandemic peak and may recur with future pandemics, creating a need for a means of triaging patients for emergent and elective spine surgery.

Methods

Using a modified Delphi technique, a cohort of 16 fellowship-trained spine surgeons from 10 academic medical centers constructed a scoring system for the triage and prioritization of emergent and elective spine surgeries. Three separate rounds of videoconferencing and written correspondence were used to reach a final scoring system. Sixteen test cases were used to optimize the scoring system so that it could categorize cases as requiring emergent, urgent, high-priority elective, or low-priority elective scheduling.

Results

The devised scoring system included 8 independent components: neurologic status, underlying spine stability, presentation of a high-risk postoperative complication, patient medical comorbidities, expected hospital course, expected discharge disposition, facility resource limitations, and local disease burden. The resultant calculator was deployed as a freely available Web-based calculator (https://jhuspine3.shinyapps.io/SpineUrgencyCalculator/).

Conclusions

We present the first quantitative urgency scoring system for the triage and prioritizing of spine surgery cases in resource-limited settings. We believe that our scoring system, although not all encompassing, has potential value as a guide for triaging spine surgical cases during the COVID pandemic and post-COVID period.