4.3 Article

The Impact of Race on Advanced Chronic Venous Insufficiency

Journal

ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY
Volume 34, Issue -, Pages 152-156

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2016.01.020

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The study aimed to determine the association between race and patient variables, hospital covariates, and outcomes in patients presenting with advanced chronic venous insufficiency. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify all Caucasian and African-American patients with a primary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision ( ICD-9) diagnosis code for venous stasis with ulceration ( 454.0), inflammation ( 454.1), or complications ( 454.2) from 1998 to 2011. CEAP scores were correlated with ICD-9 diagnosis. Demographics, CEAP classification, management, cost of care, length of stay ( LOS), and inpatient mortality were compared between races. Statistical analysis was via descriptive statistics, Student's t-test, and the Fisher's exact test. Trend analysis was completed using the Mann-Kendall test. Results: A total of 20,648 patients were identified of which 85% were Caucasian and 15% were African-American. Debridement procedures had the highest costs at $6,096 followed by skin grafting at $4,089. There was an overall decrease in the number of ulcer debridements, vein stripping, and sclerotherapy procedures between 1998 and 2011 ( P < 0.05) for both groups. However, African-American patients had significantly more ulcer debridements than their Caucasian counterparts. Conclusions: African-American patients with a primary diagnosis of venous stasis present with more advanced venous disease at a younger age compared with their Caucasian counterparts. This is associated with increased ulcer debridement, deep vein thrombosis rates and hospital charges in the African-American cohort. There are no differences in sclerotherapy or skin grafting procedures, LOS or inpatient mortality between races.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available