Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute heart failure in the emergency department (ED) or observation unit is an alternative to hospitalization. Both ED management and observation unit management have been associated with reduced costs and may be used to avoid penalties related to rehospitalizations. The purpose of this study was to examine trends in ED visits for heart failure and disposition following such visits. METHODS: We used the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a representative sample of ED visits in the United States, to estimate rates and characteristics of ED visits for heart failure between 2002 and 2010. The primary outcome was the discharge disposition from the ED. Regression models were fit to estimate trends and predictors of hospitalization and admission to an observation unit. RESULTS: The number of ED visits for heart failure remained stable over the period, from 914,739 in 2002 to 848,634 in 2010 (annual change -0.7%, 95% CI -3.7% to +2.5%). Of these visits, 74.2% led to hospitalization, wheras 3.1% led to observation unit admission. The likelihood of hospitalization did not change during the period (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.01 for each additional year), whereas admission to the observation unit increased annually (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.12, 95% CI 1.01-1.25). We observed significant regional differences in likelihood of hospitalization and observation admission. CONCLUSIONS: The number of ED visits for heart failure and the high proportion of ED visits with subsequent inpatient hospitalization have not changed in the last decade. Opportunities may exist to reduce hospitalizations by increasing short-term management of heart failure in the ED or observation unit.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of physician continuity of care with length of stay, likelihood of weekend discharge, in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission. DESIGN: A cohort study of hospitalized medical patients. The primary exposure was the weekend usual provider continuity (UPC) over the initial weekend of care. This metric was adapted from an outpatient continuity of care index. Regression models were developed to determine the association between UPC and outcomes. SETTING: An academic medical center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Length of stay which was calculated as the number of days from the first Saturday of the hospitalization to the day of discharge. RESULTS: Of the 3391 patients included in this study, the prevalence of low, moderate and high UPC for the initial weekend of hospitalization was 58.7, 22.3 and 19.1%, respectively. When compared with low continuity of care, both moderate and high continuity of care were associated with reduced length of stay, with adjusted rate ratios of 0.92 (95% CI 0.86-1.00) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.53-0.76), respectively. High continuity of care was associated with likelihood of weekend discharge (adjusted odds ratio 2.84, 95% CI 2.11-3.83) but was not significantly associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.29-1.80) or readmission (adjusted odds ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.68-1.14) when compared with low continuity of care. CONCLUSIONS: Increased weekend continuity of care is associated with reduced length of stay. Improvement in weekend cross-coverage and patient handoffs may be useful to improve clinical outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness analysis is an important tool that can be applied to the evaluation of a health treatment or policy. When the observed costs and outcomes result from a nonrandomized treatment, making causal inference about the effects of the treatment requires special care. The challenges are compounded when the observation period is truncated for some of the study subjects. This paper presents a method of unbiased estimation of cost-effectiveness using observational study data that is not fully observed. The method-twice-weighted multiple interval estimation of a marginal structural model-was developed in order to analyze the cost-effectiveness of treatment protocols for advanced dementia residents living nursing homes when they become acutely ill. A key feature of this estimation approach is that it facilitates a sensitivity analysis that identifies the potential effects of unmeasured confounding on the conclusions concerning cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that weekend hospital care is inferior to weekday care and that this difference may be related to diminished care intensity. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a metric for measuring intensity of hospital care based on utilization of the electronic health record (EHR) was associated with patient-level outcomes. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of hospitalizations at an academic medical center. Intensity of care was defined as the hourly number of provider accessions of the electronic health record, termed "EHR interactions." Hospitalizations were categorized based on the mean difference in EHR interactions between the first Friday and Saturday of hospitalization. We used regression models to determine the association of these categories with patient outcomes after adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: EHR interactions decreased from Friday to Saturday in 77% of the 9,051 hospitalizations included in the study. As compared to hospitalizations with no change in Friday to Saturday EHR interactions, the relative lengths of stay for hospitalizations with a small, moderate, and large decrease in EHR interactions were 1.05 (95% CI 1.00-1.10), 1.11 (95% CI 1.05-1.17), and 1.25 (95% CI 1.15-1.35), respectively. Although a large decrease in EHR interactions was associated with in-hospital mortality, these findings were not significant after risk adjustment (odds ratio 1.74, 95% CI 0.93-3.25). CONCLUSIONS: Intensity of inpatient care, measured by EHR interactions, significantly diminished from Friday to Saturday, and this decrease was associated with length of stay. Hospitals should consider monitoring and correcting temporal fluctuations in care intensity.

IMPORTANCE Nursing home residents with advanced dementia commonly experience burdensome and costly hospitalizations that may not extend survival or improve the quality of life. Fragmentation in health care has contributed to poor coordination of care for acutely ill nursing home residents. OBJECTIVE To compare patterns of care and quality outcomes for nursing home residents with advanced dementia covered by managed care with those covered by traditional fee-for-service Medicare. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Choices, Attitudes, and Strategies for Care of Advanced Dementia at the End-of-Life (CASCADE) was a prospective cohort study including 22 nursing homes in the Boston, Massachusetts, area that monitored 323 nursing home residents for 18 months to better understand the course of advanced dementia at or near the end of life. Data from CASCADE and Medicare were linked to determine the health insurance status of study participants. EXPOSURES The health insurance status of the resident, either managed care or traditional fee for service. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The outcomes included survival, symptoms related to comfort, treatment of pain and dyspnea, presence of pressure ulcers, presence of a do-not-hospitalize order, treatment of pneumonia, hospital transfer (admission or emergency department visit) for an acute illness, hospice referral, primary care visits, and family satisfaction with care. RESULTS Residents enrolled in managed care (n = 133) were more likely to have do-not-hospitalize orders compared with those in traditional Medicare fee for service (n = 158) (63.7% vs 50.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.4), were less likely to be transferred to the hospital for acute illness (3.8% vs 15.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.5), had more primary care visits per 90 days (mean [SD], 4.8 [2.6] vs 4.2 [5.0]; adjusted rate ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6), and had more nurse practitioner visits (3.0 [2.1] vs 0.8 [2.6]; adjusted rate ratio, 3.0; 95% CI, 2.2-4.1). Survival, comfort, and other treatment outcomes did not differ significantly across groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Medicare managed-care programs may offer a promising approach to ensure that nursing homes are able to provide appropriate, less burdensome, and affordable care, especially at the end of life.

CONTEXT: Nursing home (NH) residents with advanced dementia commonly experience burdensome and costly hospitalizations that may not extend survival or improve quality of life. Cost-effectiveness analyses of decisions to hospitalize these residents have not been reported. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of 1) not having a do-not-hospitalize (DNH) order and 2) hospitalization for suspected pneumonia in NH residents with advanced dementia. METHODS: NH residents from 22 NHs in the Boston area were followed in the Choices, Attitudes, and Strategies for Care of Advanced Dementia at the End-of-Life study conducted between February 2003 and February 2009. We conducted cost-effectiveness analyses of aggressive treatment strategies for advanced dementia residents living in NHs when they suffer from acute illness. Primary outcome measures included quality-adjusted life days (QALD) and quality-adjusted life years, Medicare expenditures, and incremental net benefits (INBs) over 15 months. RESULTS: Compared with a less aggressive strategy of avoiding hospital transfer (i.e., having DNH orders), the strategy of hospitalization was associated with an incremental increase in Medicare expenditures of $5972 and an incremental gain in quality-adjusted survival of 3.7 QALD. Hospitalization for pneumonia was associated with an incremental increase in Medicare expenditures of $3697 and an incremental reduction in quality-adjusted survival of 9.7 QALD. At a willingness-to-pay level of $100,000/quality-adjusted life years, the INBs of the more aggressive treatment strategies were negative and, therefore, not cost effective (INB for not having a DNH order, -$4958 and INB for hospital transfer for pneumonia, -$6355). CONCLUSION: Treatment strategies favoring hospitalization for NH residents with advanced dementia are not cost effective.

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents with advanced dementia commonly experience burdensome and costly interventions (eg, hospitalization) of questionable clinical benefit. To facilitate cost-effectiveness analyses of these interventions, utility-based measures are needed in order to estimate quality-adjusted outcomes. METHODS: Nursing home residents with advanced dementia in 22 facilities were followed for 18 months (N=319). Validated health status measures ascertained from nurses at baseline, quarterly, and death (N=1702 assessments) were mapped to the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 [range, 1 (perfect health) to 0 (death); scores below 0 indicate states worse than death]. To assess validity, utility scores were compared between residents who did and did not receive burdensome interventions (parenteral therapy, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes, and hospital transfers), residents with and without pneumonia, and residents who did and did not die at the last assessment. RESULTS: Mean (+/-SD) Health Utilities Index Mark 2 utility score for the cohort was 0.165+/-0.060 (range, -0.005 to 0.215). Residents spent an average of 15.5% of their days with utilities <0.10. Lower utility scores were found among residents who received burdensome interventions (0.152+/-0.067 vs. 0.171+/-0.056; P=0.0003); had pneumonia (0.147+/-0.066 vs. 0.170+/-0.057; P=0.003); and were dying (0.163+/-0.057 vs. 0.180+/-0.055; P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to map health status measures to utility-based measures for advanced dementia. This work will facilitate future cost-effectiveness analyses aimed at quantifying the cost of interventions relative to quality-based outcomes for patients with this condition.