Disparities in elective surgery for diverticulitis: Identifying the gap in care

Riccardo Lemini, Aaron C. Spaulding, Osayande Osagiede, Jordan J. Cochuyt, James M. Naessens, Marie Crandall, Robert R. Cima, Dorin T. Colibaseanu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations


Background: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in patients with diverticulitis is advantageous relative to open surgery. We aimed to determine disparities associated with MIS access for diverticulitis and post-operative complications. Methods: The Florida Inpatient Discharge Dataset was retrospectively queried for patients with diverticulitis undergoing elective surgery between 2013 and 2015. Associations of patient, physician, and hospital characteristics with surgical approach (MIS vs open) and development of complications were calculated in two separate mixed effects logistic regression models. Results: Of the 5857 patients in the analysis, older, sicker patients, residing in rural areas or with Medicaid insurance had decreased odds of receiving MIS. Being treated by high volume or colorectal surgeons increased the odds of MIS. Decreased complications were present with MIS, in younger, healthier patients, treated by high volume surgeons. Conclusions: Disparities in Florida are present in patients undergoing elective diverticulitis surgery. MIS access and complications rates are not equal, and MIS is associated with significantly reduced odds of post-operative complications. Improved access to MIS-trained surgeons is a critical step towards improving surgical outcomes for Floridians.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)899-906
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican journal of surgery
Issue number5
StatePublished - Nov 2019


  • Colorectal surgery
  • Complications
  • Disparities
  • Diverticulitis
  • Minimally invasive surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'Disparities in elective surgery for diverticulitis: Identifying the gap in care'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this