4.4 Article

Racial disparities in postoperative outcomes persist for patients with inflammatory bowel disease under a colorectal enhanced recovery program

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 226, Issue 2, Pages 227-232

Publisher

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2023.04.009

Keywords

Inflammatory bowel disease; Enhanced recovery; Surgical disparities

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that racial disparities persist in IBD populations even under Enhanced Recovery Programs (ERPs), although some disparities related to social vulnerability were mitigated. Further research is needed to achieve surgical equity for IBD patients.
Introduction: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) reduce racial disparities in surgical outcomes for general colorectal surgery populations. It is unclear, however, if disparities in IBD populations are impacted by ERPs. Methods: Retrospective study comparing IBD patients undergoing major elective colorectal operations before (2006-2014) and after (2015-2021) ERP implementation using ACS-NSQIP data. The primary outcome of length of stay (LOS) was analyzed by negative binomial regression, and secondary outcomes (complications and readmissions) by logistic regression. Results: Of 466 IBD patients, 47% were pre-ERP and 53% were ERP patients. In multivariable analysis stratified by ERP period, Black race was associated with increased odds of complications in the pre-ERP (OR 3.6, 95%CI 1.4-9.3) and ERP groups (OR 3.1 95%CI 1.3-7.6). Race was not a predictor of LOS or readmission in either group. High social vulnerability was associated with increased odds of readmission pre-ERP (OR 15.1, 95%CI 2.1-136.3), but this disparity was mitigated under ERPs (OR 1.4, 95%CI 0.4-5.6). Conclusion: While ERPs mitigated some disparities by social vulnerability, racial disparities persist in IBD populations even under ERPs. Further work is needed to achieve surgical equity for IBD patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available