Edmondo J. Robinson

International Validity of the HOSPITAL Score to Predict 30-Day Potentially Avoidable Hospital Readmissions

IMPORTANCE Identification of patients at a high risk of potentially avoidable readmission allows hospitals to efficiently direct additional care transitions services to the patients most likely to benefit. OBJECTIVE To externally validate the HOSPITAL score in an international multicenter study to assess its generalizability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS International retrospective cohort study of 117 065 adult patients consecutively discharged alive from the medical department of 9 large hospitals across 4 different countries between January 2011 and December 2011. Patients transferred to another acute care facility were excluded. EXPOSURES The HOSPITAL score includes the following predictors at discharge: hemoglobin, discharge from an oncology service, sodium level, procedure during the index admission, index type of admission (urgent), number of admissions during the last 12 months, and length of stay. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES 30-day potentially avoidable readmission to the index hospital using the SQLape algorithm. RESULTS Overall, 117 065 adults consecutively discharged alive from a medical department between January 2011 and December 2011 were studied. Of all medical discharges, 16 992 of 117 065 (14.5%) were followed by a 30-day readmission, and 11 307 (9.7%) were followed by a 30-day potentially avoidable readmission. The discriminatory power of the HOSPITAL score to predict potentially avoidable readmission was good, with a C statistic of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.72-0.72). As in the derivation study, patients were classified into 3 risk categories: low (n = 73 031 [62.4%]), intermediate (n = 27 612 [23.6%]), and high risk (n = 16 422 [14.0%]). The estimated proportions of potentially avoidable readmission for each risk category matched the observed proportion, resulting in an excellent calibration (Pearson χ2 test P = .89). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The HOSPITAL score identified patients at high risk of 30-day potentially avoidable readmission with moderately high discrimination and excellent calibration when applied to a large international multicenter cohort of medical patients. This score has the potential to easily identify patients in need of more intensive transitional care interventions to prevent avoidable hospital readmissions.

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

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.

Unit-based interprofessional leadership models in six US hospitals.

The landscape of hospital-based care has shifted to place greater emphasis on improving quality and delivering value. In response, hospitals and healthcare organizations must reassess their strategies to improve care delivery in their facilities and beyond. Although these institutional goals may be defined at the executive level, implementation takes place at local sites of care. To lead these efforts, hospitals need to appoint effective leaders at the frontlines. Hospitalists are well poised to take on the role of the local clinical care improvement leader based on their experiences as direct frontline caregivers and their integral roles in hospital-wide quality and safety initiatives. A unit-based leadership model consisting of a medical director paired with a nurse manager has been implemented in several hospitals to function as an effector arm in response to the changing landscape of inpatient care. We provide an overview of this new model of leadership and describe the experiences of 6 hospitals that have implemented it.

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

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.

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

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.

The Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network (HOMERuN): A Learning Organization Focused on Improving Hospital Care

Converting the health care delivery system into a learning organization is a key strategy for improving health outcomes. Although the collaborative learning organization approach has been successful in neonatal intensive care units and disease-specific collaboratives, there are few examples in general medicine and none in adult medicine that have leveraged the role of hospitalists nationally across multiple institutions to implement improvements. The authors describe the rationale for and early work of the Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network (HOMERuN), a collaborative of hospitals, hospitalists, and multidisciplinary care teams founded in 2011 that seeks to measure, benchmark, and improve the efficiency, quality, and outcomes of care in the hospital and afterwards. Robust and timely evaluation, with learning and refinement of approaches across institutions, should accelerate improvement efforts. The authors review HOMERuN’s collaborative model, which focuses on a community-based participatory approach modified to include hospital-based staff as well as the larger community. HOMERuN’s initial project is described, focusing on care transition measurement using perspectives from the patient, caregiver, and providers. Next steps and sustainability of the organization are discussed, including benchmarking, collaboration, and effective dissemination of best practices to stakeholders.

The Hospital Score Predicts Potentially Preventable 30-day Readmissions in Conditions Targeted by the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program

Background/Objectives: New tools to accurately identify potentially preventable 30-day readmissions are needed. The HOSPITAL score has been internationally validated for medical inpatients, but its performance in select conditions targeted by the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) is unknown. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Six geographically diverse medical centers. Participants/Exposures: All consecutive adult medical patients discharged alive in 2011 with 1 of the 4 medical conditions targeted by the HRRP (acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, and heart failure) were included. Potentially preventable 30-day readmissions were identified using the SQLape algorithm. The HOSPITAL score was calculated for all patients. Measurements: A multivariable logistic regression model accounting for hospital effects was used to evaluate the accuracy (Brier score), discrimination (c-statistic), and calibration (Pearson goodness-of-fit) of the HOSPITAL score for each 4 medical conditions. Results: Among the 9181 patients included, the overall 30-day potentially preventable readmission rate was 13.6%. Across all 4 diagnoses, the HOSPITAL score had very good accuracy (Brier score of 0.11), good discrimination (c-statistic of 0.68), and excellent calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, P=0.77). Within each diagnosis, performance was similar. In sensitivity analyses, performance was similar for all readmissions (not just potentially preventable) and when restricted to patients age 65 and above. Conclusions: The HOSPITAL score identifies a high-risk cohort for potentially preventable readmissions in a variety of practice settings, including conditions targeted by the HRRP. It may be a valuable tool when included in interventions to reduce readmissions within or across these conditions.

Simplification of the HOSPITAL score for predicting 30-day readmissions.

Objective The HOSPITAL score has been widely validated and accurately identifies high-risk patients who may mostly benefit from transition care interventions. Although this score is easy to use, it has the potential to be simplified without impacting its performance. We aimed to validate a simplified version of the HOSPITAL score for predicting patients likely to be readmitted. Design and setting Retrospective study in 9 large hospitals across 4 countries, from January through December 2011. Participants We included all consecutively discharged medical patients. We excluded patients who died before discharge or were transferred to another acute care facility. Measurements The primary outcome was any 30-day potentially avoidable readmission. We simplified the score as follows: (1) ‘discharge from an oncology division’ was replaced by ‘cancer diagnosis or discharge from an oncology division’; (2) ‘any procedure’ was left out; (3) patients were categorised into two risk groups (unlikely and likely to be readmitted). The performance of the simplified HOSPITAL score was evaluated according to its overall accuracy, its discriminatory power and its calibration. Results Thirty-day potentially avoidable readmission rate was 9.7% (n=11 307/117 065 patients discharged). Median of the simplified HOSPITAL score was 3 points (IQR 2–5). Overall accuracy was very good with a Brier score of 0.08 and discriminatory power remained good with a C-statistic of 0.69 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.69). The calibration was excellent when comparing the expected with the observed risk in the two risk categories. Conclusions The simplified HOSPITAL score has good performance for predicting 30-day readmission. Prognostic accuracy was similar to the original version, while its use is even easier. This simplified score may provide a good alternative to the original score depending on the setting.

Patient and Family Advisory Councils (PFACs): Identifying Challenges and Solutions to Support Engagement in Research

ObjectiveThe aim was to describe barriers to patient and family advisory council (PFAC) member engagement in research and strategies to support engagement in this context.MethodsWe formed a study team comprising patient advisors, researchers, physicians, and nurses. We then undertook a qualitative study using focus groups and interviews. We invited PFAC members, PFAC leaders, hospital leaders, and researchers from nine academic medical centers that are part of a hospital medicine research network to participate. All participants were asked a standard set of questions exploring the study question. We used content analysis to analyze data.ResultsEighty PFAC members and other stakeholders (45 patient/caregiver members of PFACs, 12 PFAC leaders, 12 hospital leaders, 11 researchers) participated in eight focus and 19 individual interviews. We identified ten barriers to PFAC member engagement in research. Codes were organized into three categories: (1) individual PFAC member reluctance; (2) lack of skills and training; and (3) problems connecting with the right person at the right time. We identified ten strategies to support engagement. These were organized into four categories: (1) creating an environment where the PFAC members are making a genuine and unique contribution; (2) building community between PFAC members and researchers; (3) best practice activities for researchers to facilitate engagement; and (4) tools and training.ConclusionBarriers to engaging PFAC members in research include patients’ negative perceptions of research and researchers’ lack of training. Building community between PFAC members and researchers is a foundation for partnerships. There are shared training opportunities for PFAC members and researchers to build skills about research and research engagement.