Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized medical patients undergoing transition of care by house staff teams at the end of a ward rotation are associated with an increased risk of mortality, yet best practices surrounding this transition are lacking. AIM: To assess the impact of a warm handoff protocol for end-of-rotation care transitions. SETTING: A large, university-based internal medicine residency using three different training sites. PARTICIPANTS: PGY-2 and PGY-3 internal medicine residents. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Implementation of a warm handoff protocol whereby the incoming and outgoing residents meet at the hospital to sign out in-person and jointly round at the bedside on sicker patients using a checklist. PROGRAM EVALUATION: An eight-question survey completed by 60 of 99 eligible residents demonstrated that 85% of residents perceived warm handoffs to be safer for patients (p < 0.001), while 98% felt warm handoffs improved their knowledge and comfort level of patients on day 1 of an inpatient rotation (p < 0.001) as compared to prior handoff techniques. Finally, 88% felt warm handoffs were worthwhile despite requiring additional time (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: A warm handoff protocol represents a novel strategy to potentially mitigate the known risks associated with end-of-rotation care transitions. Additional studies analyzing patient outcomes will be needed to assess the impact of this strategy.

OBJECTIVE:To examine predictors for understanding reason for hospitalization. METHODS:This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective, observational cohort study of patients 65 years or older admitted for acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, or pneumonia and discharged home. Primary outcome was complete understanding of diagnosis, based on post-discharge patient interview. Predictors assessed were the following: jargon on discharge instructions, type of medical team, whether outpatient provider knew if the patient was admitted, and whether the patient reported more than one day notice before discharge. RESULTS:Among 377 patients, 59.8% of patients completely understood their diagnosis. Bivariate analyses demonstrated that outpatient provider being aware of admission and having more than a day notice prior to discharge were not associated with patient understanding diagnosis. Presence of jargon was not associated with increased likelihood of understanding in a multivariable analysis. Patients on housestaff and cardiology teams were more likely to understand diagnosis compared to non-teaching teams (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.30-4.61, p<0.01 and OR 3.83, 95% CI 1.92-7.63, p<0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Non-teaching team patients were less likely to understand their diagnosis. Further investigation of how provider-patient interaction differs among teams may aid in development of tools to improve hospital to community transitions.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Determine timing of risk of readmissions within 30 days among patients first discharged to a skilled nursing facilities (SNF) after heart failure hospitalization and subsequently discharged home. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with SNF stays of 30 days or less following discharge from a heart failure hospitalization. Patients were followed for 30 days following discharge from SNF. We categorized patients based on SNF length of stay (LOS): 1-6 days, 7-13 days, 14-30 days. We then fit a piecewise exponential Bayesian model with the outcome as time to readmission after discharge from SNF for each group. Our event of interest was unplanned readmission; death and planned readmissions were considered as competing risks. Our model examined 2 different time intervals following discharge from SNF: 0-3 days post SNF discharge and 4-30 days post SNF discharge. We reported the hazard rate (credible interval) of readmission for each time interval. We examined all Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) patients 65 and older admitted from July 2012 to June 2015 with a principal discharge diagnosis of HF, based on methods adopted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for hospital quality measurement. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Our study included 67,585 HF hospitalizations discharged to SNF and subsequently discharged home [median age, 84 years (IQR; 78-89); female, 61.0%]; 13,257 (19.2%) were discharged with home care, 54,328 (80.4%) without. Median length of SNF admission was 17 days (IQR; 11-22). In total, 16,333 (24.2%) SNF discharges to home were readmitted within 30 days of SNF discharge; median time to readmission was 9 days (IQR; 3-18). The hazard rate of readmission for each group was significantly increased on days 0-3 after discharge from SNF compared with days 4-30 after discharge from SNF. In addition, the hazard rate of readmission during the first 0-3 days after discharge from SNF decreased as the LOS in SNF increased. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The hazard rate of readmission after SNF discharge following heart failure hospitalization is highest during the first 6 days home. Length of stay at SNF also has an effect on risk of readmission immediately after discharge from SNF; patients with a longer length of stay in SNF were less likely to be readmitted in the first 3 days after discharge from SNF.

Stagnation in hospitals' adoption of data integration functionalities coupled with reduction in the number of operational health information exchanges could become a significant impediment to hospitals' adoption of 3 critical capabilities: electronic health information exchange, interoperability, and medication reconciliation, in which electronic systems are used to assist with resolving medication discrepancies and improving patient safety. Against this backdrop, we assessed the relationships between the 3 capabilities.We conducted an observational study applying partial least squares-structural equation modeling technique to 27 variables obtained from the 2013 American Hospital Association annual survey Information Technology (IT) supplement, which describes health IT capabilities.We included 1330 hospitals. In confirmatory factor analysis, out of the 27 variables, 15 achieved loading values greater than 0.548 at P < .001, as such were validated as the building blocks of the 3 capabilities. Subsequent path analysis showed a significant, positive, and cyclic relationship between the capabilities, in that decreases in the hospitals' adoption of one would lead to decreases in the adoption of the others.These results show that capability for high quality medication reconciliation may be impeded by lagging adoption of interoperability and health information exchange capabilities. Policies focused on improving one or more of these capabilities may have ancillary benefits.

Background To isolate hospital effects on risk-standardized hospital-readmission rates, we examined readmission outcomes among patients who had multiple admissions for a similar diagnosis at more than one hospital within a given year. Methods We divided the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services hospital-wide readmission measure cohort from July 2014 through June 2015 into two random samples. All the patients in the cohort were Medicare recipients who were at least 65 years of age. We used the first sample to calculate the risk-standardized readmission rate within 30 days for each hospital, and we classified hospitals into performance quartiles, with a lower readmission rate indicating better performance (performance-classification sample). The study sample (identified from the second sample) included patients who had two admissions for similar diagnoses at different hospitals that occurred more than 1 month and less than 1 year apart, and we compared the observed readmission rates among patients who had been admitted to hospitals in different performance quartiles. Results In the performance-classification sample, the median risk-standardized readmission rate was 15.5% (interquartile range, 15.3 to 15.8). The study sample included 37,508 patients who had two admissions for similar diagnoses at a total of 4272 different hospitals. The observed readmission rate was consistently higher among patients admitted to hospitals in a worse-performing quartile than among those admitted to hospitals in a better-performing quartile, but the only significant difference was observed when the patients were admitted to hospitals in which one was in the best-performing quartile and the other was in the worst-performing quartile (absolute difference in readmission rate, 2.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 0.4 to 3.5; P=0.001). Conclusions When the same patients were admitted with similar diagnoses to hospitals in the best-performing quartile as compared with the worst-performing quartile of hospital readmission performance, there was a significant difference in rates of readmission within 30 days. The findings suggest that hospital quality contributes in part to readmission rates independent of factors involving patients. (Funded by Yale-New Haven Hospital Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation and others.).

INTRODUCTION: Orthopaedic care is shifting to alternative payment models. We examined whether New York University Langone Medical Center achieved savings under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative. METHODS: This study was a difference-in-differences study of Medicare fee-for-service patients hospitalized from April 2011 to June 2012 and October 2013 to December 2014 for lower extremity joint arthroplasty, cardiac valve procedures, or spine surgery (intervention groups), or for congestive heart failure, major bowel procedures, medical peripheral vascular disorders, medical noninfectious orthopaedic care, or stroke (control group). We examined total episode costs and costs by service category. RESULTS: We included 2,940 intervention episodes and 1,474 control episodes. Relative to the trend in the control group, lower extremity joint arthroplasty episodes achieved the greatest savings: adjusted average episode cost during the intervention period decreased by $3,017 (95% confidence interval [CI], -$6,066 to $31). For cardiac procedures, the adjusted average episode cost decreased by $2,999 (95% CI, -$8,103 to $2,105), and for spinal fusion, it increased by $8,291 (95% CI, $2,879 to $13,703). Savings were driven predominantly by shifting postdischarge care from inpatient rehabilitation facilities to home. Spinal fusion index admission costs increased because of changes in surgical technique. DISCUSSION: Under bundled payment, New York University Langone Medical Center decreased total episode costs in patients undergoing lower extremity joint arthroplasty. For patients undergoing cardiac valve procedures, evidence of savings was not as strong, and for patients undergoing spinal fusion, total episode costs increased. For all three conditions, the proportion of patients referred to inpatient rehabilitation facilities upon discharge decreased. These changes were not associated with an increase in index hospital length of stay or readmission rate. CONCLUSION: Opportunities for savings under bundled payment may be greater for lower extremity joint arthroplasty than for other conditions.

Background: Heart failure is among the most common reasons for admission to hospital and is associated with high rates of readmission. Studies have shown that the frequency of heart failure hospitalisation in temperate climates increases in winter months. While such findings suggest that the risk of hospitalisation is higher in winter as compared to summer months, there has been little evaluation of whether there is seasonal variation in the readmission risk of patients who are hospitalised for heart failure. Purpose: To examine seasonal variations in: 1) readmission risk for patients hospitalised with heart failure; and 2) frequency of heart failure hospitalisation for patients at different risk of readmission. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of United States Medicare beneficiaries age >=65 who were hospitalised for heart failure between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2015. We used a predictive model for 30-day unplanned hospital readmission to assign each hospitalisation a predicted risk of readmission; this model adds demographic and prior utilization data to the hospital-wide readmission model used by the Centres for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Each hospitalisation was categorized as lowest 20%, middle 60%, and highest 20% of predicted readmission risk. We calculated rate of hospitalisations per calendar month, predicted readmission risk, and monthly rate of hospitalisations for each risk stratum in the study period; monthly hospitalisations were standardized to 30 days. When comparing risk strata, we divided the totals for the middle 60% stratum by three. Results: Among 2,661,837 heart failure hospitalisations, we observed the highest rates of hospitalisation in January through March (range 37,185-37,949 per month) and the lowest rates in July through September (range 29,901-30,603 per month). Conversely, predicted readmission rates were lowest in January and highest in August, with rates of 23.1% and 24.0%, respectively. The number of hospitalisations increased in winter months for patients in all three risk strata, with greatest variation in seasonal differences observed for patients in the lowest 20% of predicted risk (Figure). For example, hospitalisation rates for highest risk patients were 7058 per 30 days in January versus 6473 per 30 days in August; for lowest risk patients, these values were 7852 versus 5595, respectively. (Figure Presented) Conclusion: Readmission risk decreased in winter versus summer months for patients hospitalised for heart failure. Much of the seasonal variation in heart failure hospitalisations appears to be due to a large excess of hospitalisations of these low risk patients in winter months. Our results suggest that preventative measures, such as vaccinations or dietary education, that target lower risk patients in colder months may reduce overall utilisation