Daniel J. Elliott

Effect of Hospitalist Workload on the Quality and Efficiency of Care

IMPORTANCE Hospitalist physicians face increasing pressure to maximize productivity, which may undermine the efficiency and quality of care. OBJECTIVE To determine the association between hospitalist workload and the efficiency and quality of inpatient care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 20,241 admissions of inpatients cared for by a private hospitalist group at a large academic community hospital system between February 1, 2008, and January 31, 2011. EXPOSURES Daily hospitalist workload as measured by relative value units and patient encounters from the hospitalist billing records. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The main outcomes were length of stay (LOS), cost, rapid response team activation, in-hospital mortality, patient satisfaction, and 30-day readmission rates. Key covariates included hospital occupancy and patient-level characteristics. RESULTS The LOS increased as workload increased, particularly at lower hospital occupancy. For hospital occupancies less than 75%, LOS increased from 5.5 to 7.5 days as workload increased. For occupancies of 75% to 85%, LOS increased exponentially above a daily relative value unit of approximately 25 and a census value of approximately 15. At high occupancy (>85%), LOS was J-shaped, with significant increases at higher ranges of workload. After controlling for LOS, cost increased by

Managing hypertension in urban underserved subjects using telemedicine--a clinical trial.

111 for each 1-unit increase in relative value unit and

Physician Utilization, Risk-Factor Control, and CKD Progression Among Participants in the Kidney Early Evaluation Program (KEEP)

205 for each 1-unit increase in census across the range of values. Changes in workload were not associated with the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Increasing hospitalist workload is associated with clinically meaningful increases in LOS and cost. Although our findings should be validated in different clinical settings, our results suggest the need for methods to mitigate the potential negative effects of increased hospitalist workload on the efficiency and cost of care.

Systemic Barriers to Diabetes Management in Primary Care: A Qualitative Analysis of Delaware Physicians

BACKGROUND We evaluated an Internet- and telephone-based telemedicine system for reducing blood pressure (BP) in underserved subjects with hypertension. METHODS A total of 241 patients with systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg were randomized to usual care (C; n = 121) or telemedicine (T; n = 120). The T group reported BP, heart rate, weight, steps/day, and tobacco use twice weekly. The primary outcome was BP control at 6 months. RESULTS Average age was 59.6 years, average body mass index was 33.7 kg/m(2), 79% were female, 81% were African American, 15% were white, 53% were at or below the federal poverty level, 18% were smokers, and 32% had diabetes. Six-month follow-up was achieved in 206 subjects (C: 107, T: 99). Goal BP was achieved in 52.3% in C and 54.5% in T (P = .43). Systolic BP change (C: -13.9 mm Hg, T: -18.2; P = .118) was similar in both groups. Subjects in the T group reported BP 7.7 ± 6.9 d/mo. Results were not affected by age, sex, ethnicity, education, or income. In nondiabetic T subjects, goal BP was achieved in 58.2% compared with 45.2% of diabetic T subjects (P = .024). Nondiabetic T subjects demonstrated a greater reduction in systolic BP (T: -19 ± 20 mm Hg, C: -12 ± 19 mm Hg; P = .037). No difference in BP response between C and T was noted in patients with diabetes. CONCLUSION In hypertensive subjects, engagement in a system of care with or without telemedicine resulted in significant BP reduction. Telemedicine for nondiabetic patients resulted in a greater reduction in systolic BP compared with usual care. Telemedicine may be a useful tool for managing hypertension particularly among nondiabetic subjects.

Patient-Centered Outcomes of a Value-Based Insurance Design Program for Patients with Diabetes

BACKGROUND Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a well-known risk factor for cardiovascular mortality, but little is known about the association between physician utilization and cardiovascular disease risk-factor control in patients with CKD. We used 2005-2010 data from the National Kidney Foundations Kidney Early Evaluation Program (KEEP) to examine this association at first and subsequent screenings. METHODS Control of risk factors was defined as control of blood pressure, glycemia, and cholesterol levels. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine the association between participant characteristics and seeing a nephrologist after adjusting for kidney function and paired t tests or McNemar tests to compare characteristics at first and second screenings. RESULTS Of 90,009 participants, 61.3% had a primary care physician only, 2.9% had seen a nephrologist, and 15.3% had seen another specialist. The presence of 3 risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, and hypercholesterolemia) increased from 26.8% in participants with CKD stages 1-2 to 31.9% in those with stages 4-5. Target levels of all risk factors were achieved in 7.2% of participants without a physician, 8.3% of those with a primary care physician only, 9.9% of those with a nephrologist, and 10.3% of those with another specialist. Of up to 7,025 participants who met at least one criterion for nephrology consultation at first screening, only 12.3% reported seeing a nephrologist. Insurance coverage was associated strongly with seeing a nephrologist. Of participants who met criteria for nephrology consultation, 406 (5.8%) returned for a second screening, of whom 19.7% saw a nephrologist. The percentage of participants with all risk factors controlled was higher at the second screening (20.9% vs 13.3%). CONCLUSION Control of cardiovascular risk factors is poor in the KEEP population. The percentage of participants seeing a nephrologist is low, although better after the first screening. Identifying communication barriers between nephrologists and primary care physicians may be a new focus for KEEP.

Structure and outcomes of interdisciplinary rounds in hospitalized medicine patients: A systematic review and suggested taxonomy

Primary care providers deliver the majority of care for patients with diabetes. This article presents a qualitative analysis of systemic barriers to primary care diabetes management in the small office setting in Delaware. Grounded theory was used to identify key themes of focus group discussions with 25 Delaware physicians. A total of 6 systemic barriers were identified: (1) a persistent orientation toward acute care; (2) an inability to provide proactive, population-based patient management; (3) an inability to provide adequate self-management education; (4) poor integration of payer-driven disease management activities; (5) lack of universally available clinical information; and (6) lack of public health support. The results suggest that significant systemic barriers limit the ability of primary care providers, particularly those in small practices, to effectively manage diabetes in current practice. Future primary care reform should consider how to support providers, particularly those in small practices, to overcome these barriers.

Economic Outcome of Cardiac CT-Based Evaluation and Standard of Care for Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome In the Emergency Department: A Decision Analytic Model

Value-based insurance design (VBID) initiatives have been associated with modest improvements in adherence based on evaluations of administrative claims data. The objective of this prospective cohort study was to report the patient-centered outcomes of a VBID program that eliminated co-payments for diabetes-related medications and supplies for employees and dependents with diabetes at a large health system. The authors compared self-reported values of medication adherence, cost-related nonadherence, health status, and out-of-pocket health care costs for patients before and 1 year after program implementation. Clinical metrics and satisfaction with the program also are reported. In all, 188 patients completed the follow-up evaluation. Overall, patients reported a significant reduction in monthly out-of-pocket costs (P<0.001), which corresponded to a significant reduction in cost-related nonadherence from 41% to 17.5% (P<0.001). Self-reported medication adherence increased for hyperglycemic medications (P=0.011), but there were no apparent changes in glycemic control. Overall, 89% of participants agreed that the program helped them take better care of their diabetes. The authors found that a VBID program for employees and dependents with diabetes was associated with self-reported reductions in cost-related nonadherence and improvements in medication adherence. Importantly, the program was associated with high levels of satisfaction among participants and strongly perceived by participants to facilitate medication utilization and self-management for diabetes. These findings suggest that VBID programs can accomplish the anticipated goals for medication utilization and are highly regarded by participants. Patient-centered outcomes should be included in VBID evaluations to allow decision makers to determine the true impact of VBID programs on participants.

Resident Perceptions of a Tele-Intensive Care Unit Implementation

BACKGROUND Interdisciplinary rounds (IDR) have been described to improve outcomes. However, there is limited understanding of optimal IDR design. PURPOSE To systematically review published reports of IDR to catalog types of IDR and outcomes, and assess the influence of IDR design on outcomes. DATA SOURCES Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Journals Ovid, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (EBSCOhost), and PubMed from 1990 through December 2014, and hand searching of article bibliographies. STUDY SELECTION Experimental, quasiexperimental, and observation studies in English-language literature where physicians rounded with another healthcare professional in inpatient medicine units. DATA EXTRACTION Studies were abstracted for study setting and characteristics, and design and outcomes of IDR. DATA SYNTHESIS Twenty-two studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Many were of low to medium quality with few high-quality studies. There is no clear definition of IDR in the literature. There was wide variation in IDR design and team composition across studies. We found three different models of IDR: pharmacist focused, bedside rounding, and interdisciplinary team rounding. There are reasonable data to support an association with length of stay and staff satisfaction but little data on patient safety or satisfaction. Positive outcomes may be related to particular components of IDR design, but the relationship between design and outcomes remains unclear. CONCLUSIONS Future studies should be more deliberately designed and fully reported with careful attention to team composition and features of IDR and their impact on selected outcomes. We present a proposed IDR definition and taxonomy for future studies. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:513-523.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Interprofessional-Interdepartmental Interventions Unearthing Departmental Culture

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES Cardiac computed tomography (CCT) in the emergency department may be cost saving for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but economic outcome data are limited. The objective of this study was to compare the cost of CCT-based evaluation versus standard of care (SOC) using the results of a clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS We developed a decision analytic cost-minimization model to compare CCT-based and SOC evaluation costs to obtain a correct diagnosis. Model inputs, including Medicare-adjusted patient costs, were primarily obtained from a cohort study of 102 patients at low to intermediate risk for ACS who underwent an emergency department SOC clinical evaluation and a 64-channel CCT. SOC costs included stress testing in 77% of patients. Data from published literature completed the model inputs and expanded data ranges for sensitivity analyses. RESULTS Modeled mean patient costs for CCT-based evaluation were

An Interdepartmental Care Model to Expedite Admission from the Emergency Department to the Medical ICU.

750 (24%) lower than the SOC (