Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSridhar, Srinivasan
dc.contributor.authorMouat-Hunter, Amy
dc.contributor.authorMcCrory, Bernadette
dc.identifier.citationSridhar, S., Mouat-Hunter, A., & McCrory, B. (2023). Rural implementation of the perioperative surgical home: A case-control study. World journal of orthopedics, 14(3), 123.en_US
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND. Perioperative surgical home (PSH) is a novel patient-centric surgical system developed by American Society of Anesthesiologist to improve outcomes and patient satisfaction. PSH has proven success in large urban health centers by reducing surgery cancellation, operating room time, length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates. Yet, only limited studies have assessed the impact of PSH on surgical outcomes in rural areas. AIM. To evaluate the newly implemented PSH system at a community hospital by comparing the surgical outcomes using a longitudinal case-control study. METHODS. The research study was conducted at an 83-bed, licensed level-III trauma rural community hospital. A total of 3096 TJR procedures were collected retrospectively between January 2016 and December 2021 and were categorized as PSH and non-PSH cohorts (n = 2305). To evaluate the importance of PSH in the rural surgical system, a case-control study was performed to compare TJR surgical outcomes (LOS, discharge disposition, and 90-d readmission) of the PSH cohort against two control cohorts [Control-1 PSH (C1-PSH) (n = 1413) and Control-2 PSH (C2-PSH) (n = 892)]. Statistical tests including Chi-square test or Fischer’s exact test were performed for categorical variables and Mann-Whitney test or Student’s t-test were performed for continuous variables. The general linear models (Poisson regression and binomial logistic regression) were performed to fit adjusted models. RESULTS. The LOS was significantly shorter in PSH cohort compared to two control cohorts (median PSH = 34 h, C1-PSH = 53 h, C2-PSH = 35 h) (P value < 0.05). Similarly, the PSH cohort had lower percentages of discharges to other facilities (PSH = 3.5%, C1-PSH = 15.5%, C2-PSH = 6.7%) (P value < 0.05). There was no statistical difference observed in 90-d readmission between control and PSH cohorts. However, the PSH implementation reduced the 90-d readmission percentage (PSH = 4.7%, C1-PSH = 6.1%, C2-PSH = 3.6%) lower than the national average 30-d readmission percentage which is 5.5%. The PSH system was effectively established at the rural community hospital with the help of team-based coordinated multi-disciplinary clinicians or physician co-management. The elements of PSH including preoperative assessment, patient education and optimization, and longitudinal digital engagement were vital for improving the TJR surgical outcomes at the community hospital. CONCLUSION. Implementation of the PSH system in a rural community hospital reduced LOS, increased direct-to-home discharge, and reduced 90-d readmission percentages.en_US
dc.publisherBaishideng Publishing Group Inc.en_US
dc.subjectperiperative surgical homeen_US
dc.subjectrural medicineen_US
dc.subjectcase-control studyen_US
dc.subjecttotal joint replacementsen_US
dc.subjecthealth equityen_US
dc.titleRural implementation of the perioperative surgical home: A case-control studyen_US
mus.citation.journaltitleWorld Journal of Orthopedicsen_US
mus.relation.collegeCollege of Engineeringen_US
mus.relation.departmentMechanical & Industrial Engineering.en_US
mus.relation.universityMontana State University - Bozemanen_US

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as cc-by-nc

MSU uses DSpace software, copyright © 2002-2017  Duraspace. For library collections that are not accessible, we are committed to providing reasonable accommodations and timely access to users with disabilities. For assistance, please submit an accessibility request for library material.