Sunil Kripalani

Risk Prediction Models for Hospital Readmission: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT Predicting hospital readmission risk is of great interest to identify which patients would benefit most from care transition interventions, as well as to risk-adjust readmission rates for the purposes of hospital comparison. OBJECTIVE To summarize validated readmission risk prediction models, describe their performance, and assess suitability for clinical or administrative use. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION The databases of MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception through March 2011, the EMBASE database was searched through August 2011, and hand searches were performed of the retrieved reference lists. Dual review was conducted to identify studies published in the English language of prediction models tested with medical patients in both derivation and validation cohorts. DATA EXTRACTION Data were extracted on the population, setting, sample size, follow-up interval, readmission rate, model discrimination and calibration, type of data used, and timing of data collection. DATA SYNTHESIS Of 7843 citations reviewed, 30 studies of 26 unique models met the inclusion criteria. The most common outcome used was 30-day readmission; only 1 model specifically addressed preventable readmissions. Fourteen models that relied on retrospective administrative data could be potentially used to risk-adjust readmission rates for hospital comparison; of these, 9 were tested in large US populations and had poor discriminative ability (c statistic range: 0.55-0.65). Seven models could potentially be used to identify high-risk patients for intervention early during a hospitalization (c statistic range: 0.56-0.72), and 5 could be used at hospital discharge (c statistic range: 0.68-0.83). Six studies compared different models in the same population and 2 of these found that functional and social variables improved model discrimination. Although most models incorporated variables for medical comorbidity and use of prior medical services, few examined variables associated with overall health and function, illness severity, or social determinants of health. CONCLUSIONS Most current readmission risk prediction models that were designed for either comparative or clinical purposes perform poorly. Although in certain settings such models may prove useful, efforts to improve their performance are needed as use becomes more widespread.

Hospitalist handoffs: a systematic review and task force recommendations.

BACKGROUND Handoffs are ubiquitous to Hospital Medicine and are considered a vulnerable time for patient safety. PURPOSE To develop recommendations for hospitalist handoffs during shift change and service change. DATA SOURCES PubMed (through January 2007), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Patient Safety Network, white papers, and hand search of article bibliographies. STUDY SELECTION Controlled studies evaluating interventions to improve in-hospital handoffs (n = 10). DATA EXTRACTION Studies were abstracted for design, setting, target, outcomes (including patient-level, staff-level, or system-level outcomes), and relevance to hospitalists. DATA SYNTHESIS Although there were no studies of hospitalist handoffs, the existing literature from related disciplines and expert opinion support the use of a verbal handoff supplemented with written documentation in a structured format or technology solution. Technology solutions were associated with a reduction in preventable adverse events, improved satisfaction with handoff quality, and improved provider identification. Nursing studies demonstrate that supplementing verbal exchange with a written medium leads to improved retention of information. White papers characterized effective verbal exchange, as focusing on ill patients and actions required, with time for questions and minimal interruptions. In addition, content should be updated daily to ensure communication of the latest clinical information. Using this literature, recommendations for hospitalist handoffs are presented with corresponding levels of evidence. Recommendations were reviewed by hospitalists at the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) Annual Meeting and by an interdisciplinary team of expert consultants and were endorsed by the SHM governing board. CONCLUSIONS The systematic review and resulting recommendations provide hospitalists a starting point from which to improve in-hospital handoffs.

Relationships between beliefs about medications and adherence

PURPOSE The relationships between beliefs about medications, health literacy, and self-reported medication adherence are examined. METHODS Patients from an inner-city hospital pharmacy completed an in-person, interviewer-assisted questionnaire that included the Morisky 8-item Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8), the Beliefs About Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ), and the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM). Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine predictors of self-reported medication adherence as determined by the MMAS-8. Variables included in the model were summary scores from the BMQ, REALM, and patient or regimen characteristics that were significantly associated with the MMAS-8. RESULTS A majority of the 275 study participants were African-American (86.2%), were women (73.1%), and could read at less than a high school reading level (59.7%). The average age was 53.9 years. Approximately half of the patients (52.7%) reported low medication adherence (MMAS-8 score of >2). Multivariate analyses indicated several factors were associated with low self-reported adherence, including negative beliefs about medications, younger age, low medication self-efficacy, and hyperlipidemia. Health literacy was not independently associated with beliefs or adherence. CONCLUSION Patients who had negative beliefs about medications, who were <65 years of age, or who had low medication self-efficacy reported low medication adherence.

Reducing Hospital Readmission Rates: Current Strategies and Future Directions

New financial penalties for institutions with high readmission rates have intensified efforts to reduce rehospitalization. Several interventions that involve multiple components (e.g., patient needs assessment, medication reconciliation, patient education, arranging timely outpatient appointments, and providing telephone follow-up) have successfully reduced readmission rates for patients discharged to home. The effect of interventions on readmission rates is related to the number of components implemented; single-component interventions are unlikely to reduce readmissions significantly. For patients discharged to postacute care facilities, multicomponent interventions have reduced readmissions through enhanced communication, medication safety, advanced care planning, and enhanced training to manage medical conditions that commonly precipitate readmission. To help hospitals direct resources and services to patients with greater likelihood of readmission, risk-stratification methods are available. Future work should better define the roles of home-based services, information technology, mental health care, caregiver support, community partnerships, and new transitional care personnel.

Health Literacy Explains Racial Disparities in Diabetes Medication Adherence

Although low health literacy and suboptimal medication adherence are more prevalent in racial/ethnic minority groups than Whites, little is known about the relationship between these factors in adults with diabetes, and whether health literacy or numeracy might explain racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes medication adherence. Previous work in HIV suggests health literacy mediates racial differences in adherence to antiretroviral treatment, but no study to date has explored numeracy as a mediator of the relationship between race/ethnicity and medication adherence. This study tested whether health literacy and/or numeracy were related to diabetes medication adherence, and whether either factor explained racial differences in adherence. Using path analytic models, we explored the predicted pathways between racial status, health literacy, diabetes-related numeracy, general numeracy, and adherence to diabetes medications. After adjustment for covariates, African American race was associated with poor medication adherence (r = −0.10, p < .05). Health literacy was associated with adherence (r = .12, p < .02), but diabetes-related numeracy and general numeracy were not related to adherence. Furthermore, health literacy reduced the effect of race on adherence to nonsignificance, such that African American race was no longer directly associated with lower medication adherence (r = −0.09, p = .14). Diabetes medication adherence promotion interventions should address patient health literacy limitations.

Development and Evaluation of the Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale (ARMS) among Low-Literacy Patients with Chronic Disease

OBJECTIVES Patient literacy affects many aspects of medication use and may influence the measurement of adherence. The aim of the study is to design and evaluate a medication adherence scale suitable for use across levels of patient literacy. METHODS The Adherence to Refills and Medications scale (ARMS) was developed, pilot tested, and administered to 435 patients with coronary heart disease in an inner-city primary care clinic. Psychometric evaluation performed overall and by literacy level, included an assessment of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and factor analysis. Criterion-related validity was evaluated by comparing scores with Moriskys self-reported measure of adherence, medication refill adherence, and blood pressure measurements. Lexile analysis was performed to assess the reading difficulty of the instrument. RESULTS The final 12-item scale had high internal consistency overall (Cronbachs alpha = 0.814) and among patients with inadequate (alpha = 0.792) or marginal/adequate literacy skills (alpha = 0.828). Factor analysis yielded two subscales, which pertained to taking medications as prescribed and refilling medications on schedule. The ARMS correlated significantly with the Morisky adherence scale (Spearmans rho = -0.651, P < 0.01), and it correlated more strongly with measures of refill adherence than did the Morisky scale. Patients with low ARMS scores (which indicated better adherence) were significantly more likely to have controlled diastolic blood pressure (P < 0.05), and tended to have better systolic blood pressure control. Lexile analysis demonstrated that the instrument had a favorable reading difficulty level below the eight grade. CONCLUSION The ARMS is a valid and reliable medication adherence scale when used in a chronic disease population, with good performance characteristics even among low-literacy patients.

Medication use among inner-city patients after hospital discharge: patient-reported barriers and solutions.

OBJECTIVES To better characterize medication-related problems among inner-city patients after hospital discharge and to suggest potential interventions. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between August 9, 2005, and April 3, 2006, we interviewed 84 patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes at Grady Memorial Hospital in downtown Atlanta, GA, and contacted them by telephone about 2 weeks later. English-speaking patients who managed their own medications were studied. Patients reported their adherence with filling prescriptions and taking medications after discharge, as well as barriers to and potential enablers of proper medication use. RESULTS Most of the 84 respondents were African American (74 [88%]), male (49 [58%]), and middle-aged (mean age, 54.5 years). Only 40% of patients filled their prescriptions on the day of discharge, 20% filled them 1 or 2 days later, and 18% waited 3 to 9 days; 22% had not filled their prescriptions by the time of the follow-up telephone call (median, 12 days; interquartile range, 8-18 days). Transportation, cost, and wait times at the pharmacy were cited as the main barriers. Many patients reported it was somewhat or very difficult to understand why they were prescribed medications (21%), how to take them (11%), or how to reconcile them with the medications they had been taking before hospitalization (16%). About half the patients (40 [48%]) reported some degree of nonadherence after discharge. Patients noted that several forms of assistance could improve medication use after discharge, including lower medication costs (75%), a follow-up telephone call (68%), transportation to the pharmacy (65%), pharmacist counseling before discharge (64%), and a pillbox (56%). CONCLUSION Patients often delay filling prescriptions and have difficulty understanding medication regimens after hospital discharge. Interventions that reduce medication costs, facilitate transportation, improve medication counseling, and supply such organizing aids as pillboxes might be beneficial.

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Self-efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale (SEAMS) in low-literacy patients with chronic disease.

Medication nonadherence remains a significant obstacle to achieving improved health outcomes in patients with chronic disease. Self-efficacy, the confidence in one’s ability to perform a given task such as taking one’s medications, is an important determinant of medication adherence, indicating the need for reliable and valid tools for measuring this construct. This study sought to develop a self-efficacy scale for medication adherence in chronic disease management that can be used in patients with a broad range of literacy skills. The Self-efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use (SEAMS) was developed by a multidisciplinary team with expertise in medication adherence and health literacy. Its psychometric properties were evaluated among 436 patients with coronary heart disease and other comorbid conditions. Reliability was evaluated by measuring internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Principal component factor analysis was performed to evaluate the validity of the SEAMS. Reliability and validity analyses were also performed separately among patients with low and higher literacy levels. The final 13-item scale had good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.89). A two-factor solution was found, explaining 52.3% of the scale’s variance. The scale performed similarly across literacy levels. The SEAMS is a reliable and valid instrument that may provide a valuable assessment of medication self-efficacy in chronic disease management, and appears appropriate for use in patients with low literacy skills.

Psychometric properties of the brief health literacy screen in clinical practice.

ABSTRACTBACKGROUNDThe three-item Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS) has been validated in research settings, but not in routine practice, administered by clinical personnel.OBJECTIVEAs part of the Health Literacy Screening (HEALS) study, we evaluated psychometric properties of the BHLS to validate its administration by clinical nurses in both clinic and hospital settings.PARTICIPANTSBeginning in October 2010, nurses in clinics and the hospital at an academic medical center have administered the BHLS during patient intake and recorded responses in the electronic health record.MEASURESTrained research assistants (RAs) administered the short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA) and re-administered the BHLS to convenience samples of hospital and clinic patients. Analyses included tests of internal consistency reliability, inter-administrator reliability, and concurrent validity by comparing the nurse-administered versus RA-administered BHLS scores (BHLS-RN and BHLS-RA, respectively) to the S-TOFHLA.KEY RESULTSCronbach’s alpha for the BHLS-RN was 0.80 among hospital patients (N = 498) and 0.76 among clinic patients (N = 295), indicating high internal consistency reliability. Intraclass correlation between the BHLS-RN and BHLS-RA among clinic patients was 0.77 (95 % CI 0.71–0.82) and 0.49 (95 % CI 0.40–0.58) among hospital patients. BHLS-RN scores correlated significantly with BHLS-RA scores (r = 0.33 among hospital patients; r = 0.62 among clinic patients), and with S-TOFHLA scores (r = 0.35 among both hospital and clinic patients), providing evidence of inter-administrator reliability and concurrent validity. In regression models, BHLS-RN scores were significant predictors of S-TOFHLA scores after adjustment for age, education, gender, and race. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for BHLS-RN to predict adequate health literacy on the S-TOFHLA was 0.71 in the hospital and 0.76 in the clinic.CONCLUSIONSThe BHLS, administered by nurses during routine clinical care, demonstrates adequate reliability and validity to be used as a health literacy measure.

Rationale and Design of the Pharmacist Intervention for Low Literacy in Cardiovascular Disease (PILL-CVD) Study

Background—Medication errors and adverse drug events are common after hospital discharge due to changes in medication regimens, suboptimal discharge instructions, and prolonged time to follow-up. Pharmacist-based interventions may be effective in promoting the safe and effective use of medications, especially among high-risk patients such as those with low health literacy. Methods and Results—The Pharmacist Intervention for Low Literacy in Cardiovascular Disease (PILL-CVD) study is a randomized controlled trial conducted at 2 academic centers—Vanderbilt University Hospital and Brigham and Womens Hospital. Patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome or acute decompensated heart failure were randomly assigned to usual care or intervention. The intervention consisted of pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation, inpatient pharmacist counseling, low-literacy adherence aids, and tailored telephone follow-up after discharge. The primary outcome is the occurrence of serious medication errors in the first 30 days after hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes are health care utilization, disease-specific quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Enrollment was completed September 2009. A total of 862 patients were enrolled, and 430 patients were randomly assigned to receive the intervention. Analyses will determine whether the intervention was effective in reducing serious medication errors, particularly in patients with low health literacy. Conclusions—The PILL-CVD study was designed to reduce serious medication errors after hospitalization through a pharmacist-based intervention. The intervention, if effective, will inform health care facilities on the use of pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation, inpatient counseling, low-literacy adherence aids, and patient follow-up after discharge. Clinical Trial Registration—clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT00632021.