Effect of Complementary Interventions to Redesign Care on Teamwork and Quality for Hospitalized Medical Patients : A Pragmatic Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Multiple challenges impede interprofessional teamwork and the provision of high-quality care to hospitalized patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of interventions to redesign hospital care delivery on teamwork and patient outcomes. DESIGN: Pragmatic controlled trial. Hospitals selected 1 unit for implementation of interventions and a second to serve as a control. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03745677). SETTING: Medical units at 4 U.S. hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Health care professionals and hospitalized medical patients. INTERVENTION: Mentored implementation of unit-based physician teams, unit nurse-physician coleadership, enhanced interprofessional rounds, unit-level performance reports, and patient engagement activities. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were teamwork climate among health care professionals and adverse events experienced by patients. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions, and patient experience. Difference-in-differences (DID) analyses of patient outcomes compared intervention versus control units before and after implementation of interventions. RESULTS: Among 155 professionals who completed pre- and postintervention surveys, the median teamwork climate score was higher after than before the intervention only for nurses (n = 77) (median score, 88.0 [IQR, 77.0 to 91.0] vs. 80.0 [IQR, 70.0 to 89.0]; P = 0.022). Among 3773 patients, a greater percentage had at least 1 adverse event after compared with before the intervention on control units (change, 1.61 percentage points [95% CI, 0.01 to 3.22 percentage points]). A similar percentage of patients had at least 1 adverse event after compared with before the intervention on intervention units (change, 0.43 percentage point [CI, -1.25 to 2.12 percentage points]). A DID analysis of adverse events did not show a significant difference in change (adjusted DID, -0.92 percentage point [CI, -2.49 to 0.64 percentage point]; P = 0.25). Similarly, there were no differences in LOS, readmissions, or patient experience. LIMITATION: Adverse events occurred less frequently than anticipated, limiting statistical power. CONCLUSION: Despite improved teamwork climate among nurses, interventions to redesign care for hospitalized patients were not associated with improved patient outcomes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Improve Patient Experience Among Adults During Transitions from Hospital to Home: the PArTNER study.

INTRODUCTION: Minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) need evidence-based strategies tailored to the populations they serve to improve patient-centered outcomes after hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial (RCT) from October 2014 to January 2017 at a MSH comparing the effectiveness of a stakeholder-supported Navigator intervention vs. Usual care on post-hospital patient experience, outcomes, and healthcare utilization. Community health workers and peer coaches delivered the intervention which included (1) in-hospital visits to assess barriers to health/healthcare and to develop a personalized Discharge Patient Education Tool (DPET); (2) a home visit to review the DPET; and (3) telephone-based peer coaching. The co-primary outcomes were between-group comparisons of 30-day changes in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures of anxiety and informational support (minimum important difference is 2 to 5 units change); a p-value <0.025 was considered significant using intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included death, ED visits, or readmissions and measures of emotional, social, and physical health at 30 and 60 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 1029 adults hospitalized with heart failure (28%), pneumonia (22%), MI (10%), COPD (11%), or sickle cell disease (29%). Over 80% were non-Hispanic Black. Overall, there were no significant between-group differences in the 30-day change in anxiety (adjusted difference: -1.6, 97.5% CI -3.3 to 0.1, p=0.03), informational support (adjusted difference: -0.01, 97.5% CI -2.0 to 1.9, p=0.99), or any secondary outcomes. Exploratory analyses suggested the Navigator intervention improved anxiety among participants with COPD, a primary care provider, a hospitalization in the past 12 months, or higher baseline anxiety; among participants without health insurance, the intervention improved informational support (all p-values <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic RCT at a MSH, the Navigator intervention did not improve post-hospital anxiety, informational support, or other outcomes compared to Usual care. Benefits observed in participant subgroups should be confirmed in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02114515.

Effect of COVID-19 on the implementation of a multifaceted intervention to improve teamwork and quality for hospitalized patients: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organizations made major adjustments to deliver care during the COVID pandemic, yet little is known about how these adjustments shaped ongoing quality and safety improvement efforts. We aimed to understand how COVID affected four U.S. hospitals' prospective implementation efforts in an ongoing quality improvement initiative, the REdesigning SystEms to Improve Teamwork and Quality for Hospitalized Patients (RESET) project, which implemented complementary interventions to redesign systems of care for medical patients. METHODS: We conducted individual semi-structured interviews with 40 healthcare professionals to determine how COVID influenced RESET implementation. We used conventional qualitative content analysis to inductively code transcripts and identify themes in MAXQDA 2020. RESULTS: We identified three overarching themes and nine sub-themes. The three themes were (1) COVID exacerbated existing problems and created new ones. (2) RESET and other quality improvement efforts were not the priority during the pandemic. (3) Fidelity of RESET implementation regressed. CONCLUSION: COVID had a profound impact on the implementation of a multifaceted intervention to improve quality and teamwork in four hospitals. Notably, COVID led to a diversion of attention and effort away from quality improvement efforts, like RESET, and sites varied in their ability to renew efforts over time. Our findings help explain how COVID adversely affected hospitals' quality improvement efforts throughout the pandemic and support the need for research to identify elements important for fostering hospital resilience.

Implementation of Complex Interventions: Lessons Learned From the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Transitional Care Portfolio.

BACKGROUND: Despite the well-documented risks to patient safety associated with transitions from one care setting to another, health care organizations struggle to identify which interventions to implement. Multiple strategies are often needed, and studying the effectiveness of these complex interventions is challenging. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to present lessons learned in implementing and evaluating complex transitional care interventions in routine clinical care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Nine transitional care study teams share important common lessons in designing complex interventions with stakeholder engagement, implementation, and evaluation under pragmatic conditions (ie, using only existing resources), and disseminating findings in outlets that reach policy makers and the people who could ultimately benefit from the research. RESULTS: Lessons learned serve as a guide for future studies in 3 areas: (1) Delineating the function (intended purpose) versus form (prespecified modes of delivery of the intervention); (2) Evaluating both the processes supporting implementation and the impact of adaptations; and (3) Engaging stakeholders in the design and delivery of the intervention and dissemination of study results. CONCLUSION: These lessons can help guide future pragmatic studies of care transitions.

Understanding the groups of care transition strategies used by U.S. hospitals: an application of factor analytic and latent class methods.

BACKGROUND: After activation of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) in 2012, hospitals nationwide experimented broadly with the implementation of Transitional Care (TC) strategies to reduce hospital readmissions. Although numerous evidence-based TC models exist, they are often adapted to local contexts, rendering large-scale evaluation difficult. Little systematic evidence exists about prevailing implementation patterns of TC strategies among hospitals, nor which strategies in which combinations are most effective at improving patient outcomes. We aimed to identify and define combinations of TC strategies, or groups of transitional care activities, implemented among a large and diverse cohort of U.S. hospitals, with the ultimate goal of evaluating their comparative effectiveness. METHODS: We collected implementation data for 13 TC strategies through a nationwide, web-based survey of representatives from short-term acute-care and critical access hospitals (N = 370) and obtained Medicare claims data for patients discharged from participating hospitals. TC strategies were grouped separately through factor analysis and latent class analysis. RESULTS: We observed 348 variations in how hospitals implemented 13 TC strategies, highlighting the diversity of hospitals' TC strategy implementation. Factor analysis resulted in five overlapping groups of TC strategies, including those characterized by 1) medication reconciliation, 2) shared decision making, 3) identifying high risk patients, 4) care plan, and 5) cross-setting information exchange. We determined that the groups suggested by factor analysis results provided a more logical grouping. Further, groups of TC strategies based on factor analysis performed better than the ones based on latent class analysis in detecting differences in 30-day readmission trends. CONCLUSIONS: U.S. hospitals uniquely combine TC strategies in ways that require further evaluation. Factor analysis provides a logical method for grouping such strategies for comparative effectiveness analysis when the groups are dependent. Our findings provide hospitals and health systems 1) information about what groups of TC strategies are commonly being implemented by hospitals, 2) strengths associated with the factor analysis approach for classifying these groups, and ultimately, 3) information upon which comparative effectiveness trials can be designed. Our results further reveal promising targets for comparative effectiveness analyses, including groups incorporating cross-setting information exchange.

Improving evidence-based grouping of transitional care strategies in hospital implementation using statistical tools and expert review.

BACKGROUND: As health systems transition to value-based care, improving transitional care (TC) remains a priority. Hospitals implementing evidence-based TC models often adapt them to local contexts. However, limited research has evaluated which groups of TC strategies, or transitional care activities, commonly implemented by hospitals correspond with improved patient outcomes. In order to identify TC strategy groups for evaluation, we applied a data-driven approach informed by literature review and expert opinion. METHODS: Based on a review of evidence-based TC models and the literature, focus groups with patients and family caregivers identifying what matters most to them during care transitions, and expert review, the Project ACHIEVE team identified 22 TC strategies to evaluate. Patient exposure to TC strategies was measured through a hospital survey (N = 42) and prospective survey of patients discharged from those hospitals (N = 8080). To define groups of TC strategies for evaluation, we performed a multistep process including: using ACHIEVE'S prior retrospective analysis; performing exploratory factor analysis, latent class analysis, and finite mixture model analysis on hospital and patient survey data; and confirming results through expert review. Machine learning (e.g., random forest) was performed using patient claims data to explore the predictive influence of individual strategies, strategy groups, and key covariates on 30-day hospital readmissions. RESULTS: The methodological approach identified five groups of TC strategies that were commonly delivered as a bundle by hospitals: 1) Patient Communication and Care Management, 2) Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination, 3) Home-Based Trust, Plain language, and Coordination, 4) Patient/Family Caregiver Assessment and Information Exchange Among Providers, and 5) Assessment and Teach Back. Each TC strategy group comprises three to six, non-mutually exclusive TC strategies (i.e., some strategies are in multiple TC strategy groups). Results from random forest analyses revealed that TC strategies patients reported receiving were more important in predicting readmissions than TC strategies that hospitals reported delivering, and that other key co-variates, such as patient comorbidities, were the most important variables. CONCLUSION: Sophisticated statistical tools can help identify underlying patterns of hospitals' TC efforts. Using such tools, this study identified five groups of TC strategies that have potential to improve patient outcomes.

Development and psychometric properties of surveys to assess provider perspectives on the barriers and facilitators of effective care transitions.

BACKGROUND: The quality of the discharge process and effective care transitions between settings of care are critical to minimize gaps in patient care and reduce hospital readmissions. Few studies have explored which care transition components and strategies are most valuable to patients and providers. This study describes the development, pilot testing, and psychometric analysis of surveys designed to gain providers' perspectives on current practices in delivering transitional care services. METHODS: We underwent a comprehensive process to develop items measuring unique aspects of care transitions from the perspectives of the three types of providers (downstream, ambulatory, and hospital providers). The process involved 1) an environmental scan, 2) provider interviews, 3) survey cognitive testing, 4) pilot testing, 5) a Stakeholder Advisory Group, 6) a Scientific Advisory Council, and 7) a collaborative Project ACHIEVE (Achieving Patient-Centered Care and Optimized Health in Care Transitions by Evaluating the Value of Evidence) research team. Three surveys were developed and fielded to providers affiliated with 43 hospitals participating in Project ACHIEVE. Web-based survey administration resulted in 948 provider respondents. We assessed response variability and response missingness. To evaluate the composites' psychometric properties, we examined intercorrelations of survey items, item factor loadings, model fit indices, internal consistency reliability, and intercorrelations between the composite measures and overall rating items. RESULTS: Results from psychometric analyses of the three surveys provided support for five composite measures: 1) Effort in Coordinating Patient Care, 2) Quality of Patient Information Received, 3) Organizational Support for Transitional Care, 4) Access to Community Resources, and 5) Strength of Relationships Among Community Providers. All factor loadings and reliability estimates were acceptable (loadings ≥ 0.40, α ≥ 0.70), and the fit indices showed a good model fit. All composite measures positively and significantly correlated with the overall ratings (0.13 ≤ r ≤ 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: We determined that the items and composite measures assessing the barriers and facilitators to care transitions within this survey are reliable and demonstrate satisfactory psychometric properties. The instruments may be useful to healthcare organizations and researchers to assess the quality of care transitions and target areas of improvement across different provider settings.

Development and psychometric properties of surveys to assess patient and family caregiver experience with care transitions.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to develop and administer surveys that assess patient and family caregiver experiences with care transitions and examine the psychometric properties of the surveys. The surveys were designed to ask about 1) the transitional care services that matter most to patients and their caregivers and 2) care outcomes, including the overall quality of transitional care they received, patient self-reported health, and caregiver effort/stress. METHODS: Survey items were developed based on a review of the literature, existing surveys, focus groups, site visits, stakeholder and expert input, and patient and caregiver cognitive interviews. We administered mail surveys with telephone follow up to patients recently discharged from 43 U.S. hospitals. Patients identified the caregivers who helped them during their hospital stay (Time 1 caregiver) and when they were home (Time 2 caregiver). Time 1 and Time 2 caregivers were surveyed by telephone only. The psychometric properties of the survey items and outcome composite measures were examined for each of the three surveys. Items that performed poorly across multiple analyses, including those with low variability and/or a high missing data, were dropped except when they were conceptually important. RESULTS: The analysis datasets included responses from 9282 patients, 1245 Time 1 caregivers and 1749 Time 2 caregivers. The construct validity of the three proposed outcome composite measures-Overall Quality of Transitional Care (patient and caregiver surveys), Patient Overall Health (patient survey) and Caregiver Effort/Stress (caregiver surveys) -was supported by acceptable exploratory factor analysis results and acceptable internal consistency reliability. Site-level reliability was acceptable for the two patient outcome composite measures, but was low for Caregiver Effort/Stress (< 0.70). In all surveys, the Overall Quality of Transitional Care outcome composite measure was significantly correlated with other outcome composite measures and most of the single-item measures. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the final patient and caregiver surveys are psychometrically sound and can be used by health systems, hospitals, and researchers to assess the quality of care transitions and related outcomes. Results from these surveys can be used to improve care transitions, focusing on what matters most to patients and their family caregivers.

Developing and Demonstrating the Viability and Availability of the Multilevel Implementation Strategy for Syncope Optimal Care Through Engagement (MISSION) Syncope App: Evidence-Based Clinical Decision Support Tool.

BACKGROUND: Syncope evaluation and management is associated with testing overuse and unnecessary hospitalizations. The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Syncope Guideline aims to standardize clinical practice and reduce unnecessary services. The use of clinical decision support (CDS) tools offers the potential to successfully implement evidence-based clinical guidelines. However, CDS tools that provide an evidence-based differential diagnosis (DDx) of syncope at the point of care are currently lacking. OBJECTIVE: With input from diverse health systems, we developed and demonstrated the viability of a mobile app, the Multilevel Implementation Strategy for Syncope optImal care thrOugh eNgagement (MISSION) Syncope, as a CDS tool for syncope diagnosis and prognosis. METHODS: Development of the app had three main goals: (1) reliable generation of an accurate DDx, (2) incorporation of an evidence-based clinical risk tool for prognosis, and (3) user-based design and technical development. To generate a DDx that incorporated assessment recommendations, we reviewed guidelines and the literature to determine clinical assessment questions (variables) and likelihood ratios (LHRs) for each variable in predicting etiology. The creation and validation of the app diagnosis occurred through an iterative clinician review and application to actual clinical cases. The review of available risk score calculators focused on identifying an easily applied and valid evidence-based clinical risk stratification tool. The review and decision-making factors included characteristics of the original study, clinical variables, and validation studies. App design and development relied on user-centered design principles. We used observations of the emergency department workflow, storyboard demonstration, multiple mock review sessions, and beta-testing to optimize functionality and usability. RESULTS: The MISSION Syncope app is consistent with guideline recommendations on evidence-based practice (EBP), and its user interface (UI) reflects steps in a real-world patient evaluation: assessment, DDx, risk stratification, and recommendations. The app provides flexible clinical decision making, while emphasizing a care continuum; it generates recommendations for diagnosis and prognosis based on user input. The DDx in the app is deemed a pragmatic model that more closely aligns with real-world clinical practice and was validated using actual clinical cases. The beta-testing of the app demonstrated well-accepted functionality and usability of this syncope CDS tool. CONCLUSIONS: The MISSION Syncope app development integrated the current literature and clinical expertise to provide an evidence-based DDx, a prognosis using a validated scoring system, and recommendations based on clinical guidelines. This app demonstrates the importance of using research literature in the development of a CDS tool and applying clinical experience to fill the gaps in available research. It is essential for a successful app to be deliberate in pursuing a practical clinical model instead of striving for a perfect mathematical model, given available published evidence. This hybrid methodology can be applied to similar CDS tool development.

Planning Implementation Success of Syncope Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Emergency Department Using CFIR Framework.

Background and Objectives: Overuse and inappropriate use of testing and hospital admission are common in syncope evaluation and management. Though guidelines are available to optimize syncope care, research indicates that current clinical guidelines have not significantly impacted resource utilization surrounding emergency department (ED) evaluation of syncope. Matching implementation strategies to barriers and facilitators and tailoring strategies to local context hold significant promise for a successful implementation of clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Our team applied implementation science principles to develop a stakeholder-based implementation strategy. Methods and Materials: We partnered with patients, family caregivers, frontline clinicians and staff, and health system administrators at four health systems to conduct quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews for context assessment. The identification of implementation strategies was done by applying the CFIR-ERIC Implementation Strategy Matching Tool and soliciting stakeholders' inputs. We then co-designed with patients and frontline teams, and developed and tested specific strategies. Results: A total of 114 clinicians completed surveys and 32 clinicians and stakeholders participated in interviews. Results from the surveys and interviews indicated low awareness of syncope guidelines, communication challenges with patients, lack of CPG protocol integration into ED workflows, and organizational process to change as major barriers to CPG implementation. Thirty-one patients and their family caregivers participated in interviews and expressed their expectations: clarity regarding their diagnosis, context surrounding care plan and diagnostic testing, and a desire to feel cared about. Identifying change methods to address the clinician barriers and patients and family caregivers expectations informed development of the multilevel, multicomponent implementation strategy, MISSION, which includes patient educational materials, mentored implementation, academic detailing, Syncope Optimal Care Pathway and a corresponding mobile app, and Lean quality improvement methods. The pilot of MISSION demonstrated feasibility, acceptability and initial success on appropriate testing. Conclusions: Effective multifaceted implementation strategies that target individuals, teams, and healthcare systems can be employed to plan successful implementation and promote adherence to syncope CPGs.

Value-based syncope evaluation and management: Perspectives of health care professionals on readiness, barriers and enablers.

BACKGROUND: Syncope is a common condition seen in the emergency department. Given the multitude of etiologies, research exists on the evaluation and management of syncope. Yet, physicians' approach to patients with syncope is variable and often not value based. The 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Patients with Syncope includes a focus on unnecessary medical testing. However, little research assesses implementation of the guidelines. METHODS: Mixed methods approach was applied. The targeted provider specialties include emergency medicine, hospital medicine and cardiology. The Evidence-based Practice Attitude Scale-36 and the Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment surveys were distributed to four different hospital sites. We then conducted focus groups and key informant interviews to obtain more information about clinicians' perceptions to guideline-based practice and barriers/facilitators to implementation. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were used for survey analysis. Two-stage coding was used to identify themes with NVivo. RESULTS: Analysis of surveys revealed that overall attitude toward evidence-based practices was moderate and implementation of new guidelines were seen as a burden, potentially decreasing compliance. There were differences across hospital settings. Five common themes emerged from interviews: uncertainty of a syncope diagnosis, rise of consumerism in health care, communication challenge with patient, provider differences in standardized care, and organizational processes to change. CONCLUSIONS: Despite recommendations for the use of syncope guidelines, adherence is suboptimal. Overcoming barriers to use will require a paradigm shift. A multifaceted approach and collaborative relationships are needed to adhere to the Guidelines to improve patient care and operational efficiency.

Redesigning systems to improve teamwork and quality for hospitalized patients (RESET): study protocol evaluating the effect of mentored implementation to redesign clinical microsystems.

BACKGROUND: A number of challenges impede our ability to consistently provide high quality care to patients hospitalized with medical conditions. Teams are large, team membership continually evolves, and physicians are often spread across multiple units and floors. Moreover, patients and family members are generally poorly informed and lack opportunities to partner in decision making. Prior studies have tested interventions to redesign aspects of the care delivery system for hospitalized medical patients, but the majority have evaluated the effect of a single intervention. We believe these interventions represent complementary and mutually reinforcing components of a redesigned clinical microsystem. Our specific objective for this study is to implement a set of evidence-based complementary interventions across a range of clinical microsystems, identify factors and strategies associated with successful implementation, and evaluate the impact on quality. METHODS: The RESET project uses the Advanced and Integrated MicroSystems (AIMS) interventions. The AIMS interventions consist of 1) Unit-based Physician Teams, 2) Unit Nurse-Physician Co-leadership, 3) Enhanced Interprofessional Rounds, 4) Unit-level Performance Reports, and 5) Patient Engagement Activities. Four hospital sites were chosen to receive guidance and resources as they implement the AIMS interventions. Each study site has assembled a local leadership team, consisting of a physician and nurse, and receives mentorship from a physician and nurse with experience in leading similar interventions. Primary outcomes include teamwork climate, assessed using the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire, and adverse events using the Medicare Patient Safety Monitoring System (MPSMS). RESET uses a parallel group study design and two group pretest-posttest analyses for primary outcomes. We use a multi-method approach to collect and triangulate qualitative data collected during 3 visits to study sites. We will use cross-case comparisons to consider how site-specific contextual factors interact with the variation in the intensity and fidelity of implementation to affect teamwork and patient outcomes. DISCUSSION: The RESET study provides mentorship and resources to assist hospitals as they implement complementary and mutually reinforcing components to redesign the clinical microsystems caring for medical patients. Our findings will be of interest and directly applicable to all hospitals providing care to patients with medical conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03745677 . Retrospectively registered on November 19, 2018.

Preventability of Early Versus Late Hospital Readmissions in a National Cohort of General Medicine Patients.

Background: Many experts believe that hospitals with more frequent readmissions provide lower-quality care, but little is known about how the preventability of readmissions might change over the postdischarge time frame. Objective: To determine whether readmissions within 7 days of discharge differ from those between 8 and 30 days after discharge with respect to preventability. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: 10 academic medical centers in the United States. Patients: 822 adults readmitted to a general medicine service. Measurements: For each readmission, 2 site-specific physician adjudicators used a structured survey instrument to determine whether it was preventable and measured other characteristics. Results: Overall, 36.2% of early readmissions versus 23.0% of late readmissions were preventable (median risk difference, 13.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 5.5 to 26.4 percentage points]). Hospitals were identified as better locations for preventing early readmissions (47.2% vs. 25.5%; median risk difference, 22.8 percentage points [interquartile range, 17.9 to 31.8 percentage points]), whereas outpatient clinics (15.2% vs. 6.6%; median risk difference, 10.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 4.6 to 12.2 percentage points]) and home (19.4% vs. 14.0%; median risk difference, 5.6 percentage points [interquartile range, -6.1 to 17.1 percentage points]) were better for preventing late readmissions. Limitation: Physician adjudicators were not blinded to readmission timing, community hospitals were not included in the study, and readmissions to nonstudy hospitals were not included in the results. Conclusion: Early readmissions were more likely to be preventable and amenable to hospital-based interventions. Late readmissions were less likely to be preventable and were more amenable to ambulatory and home-based interventions. Primary Funding Source: Association of American Medical Colleges.

Care Transitions From Patient and Caregiver Perspectives.

PURPOSE: Despite concerted actions to streamline care transitions, the journey from hospital to home remains hazardous for patients and caregivers. Remarkably little is known about the patient and caregiver experience during care transitions, the services they need, or the outcomes they value. The aims of this study were to (1) describe patient and caregiver experiences during care transitions and (2) characterize patient and caregiver desired outcomes of care transitions and the health services associated with them. METHODS: We interviewed 138 patients and 110 family caregivers recruited from 6 health networks across the United States. We conducted 34 homogenous focus groups (103 patients, 65 caregivers) and 80 key informant interviews (35 patients, 45 caregivers). Audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed using principles of grounded theory to identify themes and the relationship between them. RESULTS: Patients and caregivers identified 3 desired outcomes of care transition services: (1) to feel cared for and cared about by medical providers, (2) to have unambiguous accountability from the health care system, and (3) to feel prepared and capable of implementing care plans. Five care transition services or provider behaviors were linked to achieving these outcomes: (1) using empathic language and gestures, (2) anticipating the patient's needs to support self-care at home, (3) collaborative discharge planning, (4) providing actionable information, and (5) providing uninterrupted care with minimal handoffs. CONCLUSIONS: Clear accountability, care continuity, and caring attitudes across the care continuum are important outcomes for patients and caregivers. When these outcomes are achieved, care is perceived as excellent and trustworthy. Otherwise, the care transition is experienced as transactional and unsafe, and leaves patients and caregivers feeling abandoned by the health care system.

The impact of health and health insurance literacy on access to care for Hispanic/Latino communities.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of health literacy (HL) and health insurance literacy (HIL) on health insurance status and access to health care services for Spanish-speaking communities living in Massachusetts. METHODS: A total of 139 surveys (descriptive, knowledge-based HIL questions, and Short Assessment of Health Literacy in Spanish) and 30 semi-structured interviews were collected and analyzed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney U test, and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The majority of participants had inadequate HL (56%) and HIL (93%). There were differences in HL scores (t = 4.1; p < .0001) between the insured (M = 12.3, SD = 5.7) and uninsured (M = 7.9, SD = 6.7) and differences (t = 1.9; p = .05) between those with adequate HIL (M = 14.3, SD = 4.3) and inadequate HIL (M = 10.2, SD = 6.6). Participants who were uninsured (MW U = 37.6; p < .0001) and who had inadequate HL (MW U = 5.2; p = .02) were more likely to have never accessed health care in the U.S. Participants who had never accessed health care were 93% less likely to be insured and those with adequate HL were three times more likely to be insured. CONCLUSIONS: Health literacy and HIL are closely associated with insurance status and access to health care for Spanish-speaking communities, indicating the need for further research and enhanced public health efforts to improve knowledge and awareness around navigating health care systems.

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.

Evaluation of a novel mentor program to improve surgical care for US hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a novel mentor program for 27 US surgeons, charged with improving quality at their respective hospitals, having been paired 1:1 with 27 surgeon mentors through a state-wide quality improvement (QI) initiative. DESIGN: Mixed-methods utilizing quantitative surveys and in-depth semi-structured interviews. SETTING: The Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC) utilized a novel Mentor Program to guide surgeons new to QI. PARTICIPANTS: All mentor-mentee pairs received the survey (n = 27). Purposive sampling identified a subset of mentors (n = 8) and mentees (n = 4) for in-depth semi-structured interviews. INTERVENTION: Surgeons with expertise in QI mentored surgeons new to QI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (i) Quantitative: self-reported satisfaction with the mentor program; (ii) Qualitative: key themes suggesting actions and strategies to facilitate mentorship in QI. RESULTS: Mentees expressed satisfaction with the mentor program (n = 24, 88.9%) and agreed that mentorship is vital to ISQIC (n = 24, 88.9%). Analysis of interview data revealed four key themes: (i) nuances of data management, (ii) culture of quality and safety, (iii) mentor-mentee relationship and (iv) logistics. Strategies from these key themes include: utilize raw data for in-depth QI understanding, facilitate presentations to build QI support, identify opportunities for in-person meetings and establish scheduled conference calls. The mentor's role required sharing experiences and acting as a resource. The mentee's role required actively bringing questions and identifying barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Mentorship plays a vital role in advancing surgeon knowledge and engagement with QI in ISQIC. Key themes in mentorship reflect strategies to best facilitate mentorship, which may serve as a guide to other collaboratives.

Use of Unit-Based Interventions to Improve the Quality of Care for Hospitalized Medical Patients: A National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Recent publications have drawn attention to interventions to redesign aspects of care delivery for hospitalized medical patients, including localization of physicians to specific units, nurse-physician co-leadership, interdisciplinary rounds (IDR), and access to quality performance data. Use of these interventions across hospitals has not been previously described. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of internal medicine (IM) residency program directors and hospital medicine group (HMG) leaders in the United States was conducted to characterize use of unit-based interventions on inpatient medical services. The survey served as a pilot study to assess the use of localization of physicians to specific units, nurse-physician co-leadership, IDR, and access to quality performance data. RESULTS: Ninety-four IM program directors (response rate, 23.3%) and 62 HMG leaders (response rate, 20.7%) responded. No single intervention was used by the vast majority of sites, and the extent and intensity of use varied. About a quarter of respondents indicated that physicians typically cared for patients on only one to two units, a third or fewer had unit co-leadership on at least half of hospital units, fewer than half had daily IDR, and approximately half had access to unit-level performance data. Most IM programs and hospitalist groups had implemented 0 to 1 interventions to a high degree of fidelity, and few (≤ 5%) had implemented all 4. CONCLUSION: IM program directors and HMG leaders reported variation in use of unit-based interventions to improve quality of care for medical inpatients. Future research should evaluate the association of the degree and intensity of using unit-based interventions on patient outcomes.

Understanding Facilitators and Barriers to Care Transitions: Insights from Project ACHIEVE Site Visits.

BACKGROUND: Care transitions between clinicians or settings are often fragmented and marked by adverse events. To increase patient safety and deliver more efficient and effective health care, new ways to optimize these transitions need to be identified. A study was conducted to delineate facilitators and barriers to implementation of transitional care services at health systems that may have been adopted or adapted from published evidence-based models. METHODS: From March 2015 through December 2015, site visits were conducted across the United States at 22 health care organizations-community hospitals, academic medical centers, integrated health systems, and broader community partnerships. At each site, direct observation and document review were conducted, as were semistructured interviews with a total of 810 participants (5 to 57 participants per site) representing various stakeholder groups, including management and leadership, transitional care team members, internal stakeholders, community partners, patients, and family caregivers. RESULTS: Facilitators of effective care transitions included collaborating within and beyond the organization, tailoring care to patients and caregivers, and generating buy-in among staff. Commonly reported barriers included poor integration of transitional care services, unmet patient or caregiver needs, underutilized services, and lack of physician buy-in. CONCLUSION: True community partnership, high-quality communication, patient and family engagement, and ongoing evaluation and adaptation of transitional care strategies are ultimately needed to facilitate effective care transitions. Health care organizations can strategically prioritize transitional care service delivery through staffing decisions, by making transitional care part of the organization's formal board agenda, and by incentivizing excellence in providing transitional care services.