The impact of healthcare rationing on elective and emergency hernia repair

Purpose

In 2011 the local clinical commissioning group introduced a policy restricting funding for elective hernia repairs. Anecdotally, it was felt that this resulted in an increased number of emergency hernia repairs in our trust. Our primary objective was to assess whether this was actually the case. Our secondary objective was to quantify the risks of non-elective hernia repair.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study, analysing all hernia surgeries performed between 2010 and 2013. The data were obtained from the trust Patient Information System. A total of 2556 patients underwent repair of inguinal, umbilical, incisional, femoral or ventral hernias over this time.

Results

As the policy intended, the number of elective hernia repairs reduced from 857 over 12 months before the funding restrictions to 606 in the same period afterwards (p < 0.001). Over the same time period, however, a significant rise in total emergency hernia repairs was demonstrated, increasing from 98 to 150 (p < 0.001). 30-day readmission rates also increased from 5.1 % before the policy introduction to 8.5 % afterwards (p = 0.006). In our data, the rate of bowel resection rises from 0.97 to 12.9 % for emergency operation compared to elective hernia repair (p < 0.001), while the median length of stay rises from less than 24 h to 3 days.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that the funding restrictions introduced in 2011 were followed by a statistically significant and unintended increase in emergency hernia repairs in our trust, with associated increased risks to patient safety.