The Impact of a High Sensitivity Troponin HEART Pathway Based Clinical Decision Protocol on Observation Visits.

BACKGROUND: Use of high-sensitivity troponin (hs-cTn) might lead to an increase in hospital observation visits due to higher number of abnormal troponin levels. STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of incorporating hs-cTn into a chest pain clinical decision protocol (CDP) on observation visits in a large academic health system. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational cohort study of all chest pain observation patients in four hospitals in an academic health system over 24 months. All hospitals used the Beckman Coulter Unicel Dxi instrument, and all shared the same emergency department (ED) chest pain protocol, which used the HEART pathway and serial troponins and directed ED dispositions to either an observation stay, ED discharge, or inpatient admission. Outcomes studied before and after introduction of a hs-cTn protocol included daily chest pain observation census, cost, observation hours, and inpatient admit rate. Census was reported as the daily chest pain observation census and as a proportion of all observation visits. Data was retrieved from a health system data warehouse and a cost accounting program. RESULTS: There were 6,712 chest pain observation visits over 24-months, with 4,087 visits before and 2,634 visits after the hs-cTn protocol implementation. Comparison groups were similar in terms of age, gender, and type of insurance. There were 10.59 (95% CI: 10.24 - 10.95) daily chest pain observation visits before and 7.66 (95% CI: 7.34 - 7.97) visits after implementation, with a 28% (95% CI: 35% - 20%) decrease in the total daily census. As a portion of all observation visits, there was a 22% drop in the proportion that were observed for chest pain. The daily number of chest pain patients requiring inpatient admission was unchanged. The daily total direct cost for chest pain observation decreased with an effective daily cost savings of $4,313 USD (95% CI: $1,534 - $6,998). The total daily number of chest pain observation bed hours also decreased by 41.5 hours (95% CI 13.4 - 96.4 hr). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a hs-cTn chest pain protocol was associated with a significant decrease in the number and proportion of observation visits, a decrease in total daily cost and bed hours used, and no increase in inpatient admissions.

The feasibility of emergency department observation units in the management of mild to moderate hyponatremia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the feasibility of managing hyponatremia patients under outpatient observation status in an academic medical center, and compare outcomes based on the use of an emergency department observation unit (EDOU). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of emergency department hyponatremic patients managed in four hospitals within a large urban academic medical center over 27 months. All patients had an admit-to-observation order, ICD-10 codes for hyponatremia, and mild (130-135 mmol/L) to moderate (121-129 mmol/L) hyponatremia. Observation settings were divided into two groups: EDOU and Non-Observation Unit (NOU) inpatient beds. Severe hyponatremia (≤120 mmol/L) was excluded. Primary clinical outcomes were inpatient admit rate, length of stay (LOS), total direct cost, the rate of adverse events and 30-day recidivism. RESULTS: 188 patients were managed as an observation patient, with 64 managed in an EDOU setting (age 74.0 yr, 70.3% female) and 124 managed in a NOU setting (age 71.5 yr, 64.5% female). Patient subgroups were similar in terms of presenting complaints, comorbidities, and medication histories. Initial and final sodium levels were similar between settings: EDOU (125.1 to 132.6 mmol/L) vs NOU (123.5 to 132.0 mmol/L). However, outcomes differed by setting for observation to inpatient admit rate (EDOU 28.1% vs NOU 37.9%, adjusted effect 0.70), overall length of stay (EDOU 19.2 h vs NOU 31.9 h; adjusted effect -10.5 h and total direct cost ($1230 vs $1531; adjusted effect -$167). EDOU sodium correction rates were faster (EDOU 0.44 mmol/L/h vs 0.24 mmol/L/h; adjusted effect 0.15 mmol/L/h) and 30-day recidivism rate was similar (EDOU 13% vs NOU 15%). There were no index visit deaths or intensive care unit admissions. CONCLUSION: Management of selected hyponatremia patients under observation status is feasible, with the EDOU setting demonstrating lower admit rates, shorter length of stay, and lower total direct costs with similar clinical outcomes.

The Impact of "Emergency-only" Hemodialysis on Hospital Cost and Resource Utilization.

INTRODUCTION: Undocumented immigrants are excluded from benefits that help compensate for scheduled outpatient hemodialysis (HD), compelling them to use emergency departments (ED) for HD. Consequently, these patients can receive "emergency-only" HD after presenting to the ED with critical illness due to untimely dialysis. Our objective was to describe the impact of emergency-only HD on hospital cost and resource utilization in a large academic health system that includes public and private hospitals. METHODS: This retrospective observational study of health and accounting records took place at five teaching hospitals (one public, four private) over 24 consecutive months from January 2019 to December 2020. All patients had emergency and/or observation visits, renal failure codes (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Rev, Clinical Modification), emergency HD procedure codes, and an insurance status of "self-pay." Primary outcomes included frequency of visits, total cost, and length of stay (LOS) in the observation unit. Secondary objectives included evaluating the variation in resource use between persons and comparing these metrics between the private and public hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 15,682 emergency-only HD visits were made by 214 unique persons, for an average of 36.6 visits per person per year. The average cost per visit was $1,363, for an annual total cost of $10.7 million. The average LOS was 11.4 hours. This resulted in 89,027 observation-hours annually, or 3,709 observation-days. The public hospital dialyzed more patients compared to the private hospitals, especially due to repeat visits by the same persons. CONCLUSION: Health policies that limit hemodialysis of uninsured patients to the ED are associated with high healthcare costs and a misuse of limited ED and hospital resources.

The Impact of Virtual Care in an Emergency Department Observation Unit.

STUDY OBJECTIVE(S): We report the impact of telemedicine virtual rounding in emergency department observation units (EDOU) on the effectiveness, safety, and cost relative to traditional observation care. METHODS: In this retrospective diff-in-diff study, we compared observation visit outcomes from 2 EDOUs before (pre) and after (post) full adoption of telemedicine rounding tele-observation (tele-obs) with usual care in control EDOU and care in a hospital bed in an integrated health system without tele-obs. Tele-obs physicians did not work at the control hospital. Outcomes were the length of stay, total direct costs, admission status, and adverse events (ICU and death). Difference-in-differences modeling evaluated outcomes with covariates including age, sex, payer type, and clinical classification software diagnostic category. Data from a system data warehouse and a cost accounting database were used. RESULTS: Of the 20,861 EDOU visits, 15,630 (74.9%) were seen in the preperiod and 6,657 (31.9%) in control EDOU. Of 23,055 non-EDOU inpatient visits assigned to observation status (nonobservation unit), 76% were seen in the preperiod. Adjusted length of stay was not significantly different for tele-obs and control EDOUs (26.4 hours versus 23.5 hours), which remained lower than in hospital settings (37.9 hours). The pre-post diff-in-diff was not significant (P=.78). Inpatient admission status was similar for tele-obs and control EDOUs (20.9% versus 22.4.%) and lower than in hospital settings (30.3%). Prepost odds ratios for inpatient admission and adverse outcomes did not change significantly for all study groups. Adjusted costs increased over time for all settings; however, the prepost median cost change was not significantly different between tele-obs EDOUs and control EDOUs ($162.5 versus $235) and was lower than the change for control hospital settings ($783). Median tele-obs EDOU cost over both periods ($1,541) remained significantly lower than hospital costs ($2,413). CONCLUSION: Using tele-obs to manage observation patients in an ED observation unit was not associated with significant differences in length of stay, admission status, measured adverse events, or total direct cost.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

The impact of emergency department observation units on a health system.

IMPORTANCE: Protocol driven ED observation units (EDOU) have been shown to improve outcomes for patients and payers, however their impact on an entire health system is unknown. Two thirds of US hospitals do not have such units. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of a protocol-driven EDOU on health system length of stay, cost, and resource utilization. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, cross-sectional study of observation patients managed over 25 consecutive months in a four-hospital academic health system. Patients were identified using the "admit to observation" order and limited to adult, emergent / urgent, non-obstetric patients. Data was retrieved from a cost accounting database. The primary study exposure was the setting for observation care which was broken into three discrete groups: EDOUs (n = 3), hospital medicine observation units (HMSOU, n = 2), and a non-observation unit (NOU) bed located anywhere in the hospital. Outcomes included observation-to-inpatient admission rate, length of stay (LoS), total direct cost, and inpatient bed days saved. Unadjusted outcomes were compared, and outcomes were adjusted using multiple study variables. LoS and cost were compared using quantile regressions. Inpatient admit rate was compared using logistic regressions. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 48,145 patients who were 57.4% female, 48% Black, 46% White, median age of 58, with some variation in most common diagnoses and payer groups. The median unadjusted outcomes favored EDOU over NOU settings for admission rate (13.1% vs 37.1%), LoS [17.9 vs 35.6 h), and cost ($1279 vs $2022). The adjusted outcomes favored EDOU over NOU settings for admission rates [12.3% (95% CI 9.7-15.3) vs 26.4% (CI 21.3-32.3)], LoS differences [11.1 h (CI 10.6-11.5 h)] and cost differences [$127.5 (CI $105.4 - $149.5)]. Adjusted differences were similar and favored EDOU over HMSOU settings. For the health system, the total adjusted annualized savings of the EDOUs was 10,399 bed days and $1,329,443 in total direct cost per year. CONCLUSION: Within an academic medical center, EDOUs were associated with improved resource utilization and reduced cost. This represents a significant opportunity for hospitals to improve efficiency and contain costs.

Fast track dialysis: Improving emergency department and hospital throughput for patients requiring hemodialysis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of a novel communication and triage pathway called fast track dialysis (FTD) on the length of stay (LOS), resource utilization, and charges for unscheduled hemodialysis for end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Prospective and retrospective cohorts of ESRD patients meeting requirements of routine or urgent hemodialysis at a tertiary academic hospital from September 25th, 2016 to September 25th, 2018 in 1 year cohorts. Two sample t-tests were used to compare most outcomes of the cohorts with a Mann-Whitney U test used for skewed data. Nephrology group outcomes were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests. RESULTS: There were 98 encounters in the historical cohort and 143 encounters in the fast track dialysis cohort. FTD had significantly lowered median ED LOS (4.05 h, vs 5.3 h, p < 0.001), median hospital LOS (12.8 h vs 27 h, p < 0.001), time to hemodialysis (4.78 h vs 7.29 h, p < 0.001), and median hospital charges ($26,040 vs $30,747, p < 0.016). The FTD cohort had increased 30 day ED return for each encounter compared to the historical cohort (1.85 visits vs 0.73 visits, p < 0.001), however no significant increase in 1 year ED visits (6.52 visits vs 5.80, p = 0.4589) or 1 year readmissions (5.89 readmissions vs 4.81 readmissions, p = 0.3584). Most nephrology groups had significantly lower time to hemodialysis order placement and time to start hemodialysis. CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary approach with key stakeholders using a standard pathway can lead to improved efficiency in throughput, reduced charges, and hospital resource utilization for patients needing urgent or routine hemodialysis. A study with a dedicated geographic observation unit for protocolized short stay patients including conditions ranging from low risk chest pain to transient ischemic events that incorporates FTD patients under this protocol should be considered.

The Changing Role of Chest Pain in the Emergency Department Observation Unit.

BACKGROUND: This study objective was to describe changes in the utilization of a protocol-driven emergency department observation unit (EDOU) for chest pain over time. METHODS: This is a retrospective serial cross-sectional study of data from a clinical data warehouse of a single integrated healthcare system. We estimated long-term trends (2009-2019) in EDOU visits at 4 system hospitals, using monthly proportions as the main outcome, and month of visit as the exposure variable, accounting for age and sex. Rate changes associated with compulsory use of the History, EKG, Age, Risk factors, Troponin (HEART) score in 2016 were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 83,168 EDOU admissions among 1.3 million ED visits during the study interval, with an average admission rate of 5.9% of ED visits. The most common conditions were chest pain (41.2%), transient ischemic attack (7.8%), dehydration (6.3%), syncope (5.8%), and abdominal pain (5.2%). In each hospital, there was a temporal annual decline in the proportion of EDOU visits for chest pain protocols ranging from -7.9% to -2.8%, an average rate of -3.3% per year (95% CI, -4.6% to -2.0%) or a 54% (from 54% to 25%) relative decline in over the 11-year study interval. This decline was significantly steeper in younger middle-aged patients (ages 39-49). The HEART score intervention had a small impact on baseline decline of -3.1% at the 2 intervention hospitals, reducing it by -1.5% (95% CI, -2.2% to -0.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of the EDOU for chest pain decreased over time, with corresponding increases in other conditions. This decline preceded the introduction of the HEART score.

Disability After Minor Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack in the POINT Trial.

Background and Purpose- While combination aspirin and clopidogrel reduces recurrent stroke compared with aspirin alone in patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke, the effect on disability is uncertain. Methods- The POINT trial (Platelet-Oriented Inhibition in New TIA and Minor Ischemic Stroke) randomized patients with TIA or minor stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≤3) within 12 hours of onset to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin plus clopidogrel versus aspirin alone. The primary outcome measure was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death. We performed a post hoc exploratory analysis to examine the effect of treatment on overall disability (defined as modified Rankin Scale score >1) at 90 days, as well as disability ascribed by the local investigator to index or recurrent stroke. We also evaluated predictors of disability. Results- At 90 days, 188 of 1964 (9.6%) of patients enrolled with TIA and 471 of 2586 (18.2%) of those enrolled with stroke were disabled. Overall disability was similar between patients assigned DAPT versus aspirin alone (14.7% versus 14.3%; odds ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.82-1.14]; P=0.69). However, there were numerically fewer patients with disability in conjunction with a primary outcome event in the DAPT arm (3.0% versus 4.0%; odds ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.53-1.01]; P=0.06) and significantly fewer patients in the DAPT arm with disability attributed by the investigators to either the index event or recurrent stroke (5.9% versus 7.4%; odds ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.62-0.99]; P=0.04). Notably, disability attributed to the index event accounted for the majority of this difference (4.5% versus 6.0%; odds ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57-0.96]; P=0.02). In multivariate analysis, age, subsequent ischemic stroke, serious adverse events, and major bleeding were significantly associated with disability in TIA; for those with stroke, female sex, hypertension, or diabetes mellitus, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, recurrent ischemic stroke, subsequent myocardial infarction, and serious adverse events were associated with disability. Conclusions- In addition to reducing recurrent stroke in patients with acute minor stroke and TIA, DAPT might reduce stroke-related disability. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00991029.

Financial Viability of Emergency Department Observation Unit Billing Models.

BACKGROUND: Outpatients receive observation services to determine the need for inpatient admission. These services are usually provided without the use of condition-specific protocols and in an unstructured manner, scattered throughout a hospital in areas typically designated for inpatient care. Emergency department observation units (EDOUs) use protocolized care to offer an efficient alternative with shorter lengths of stay, lower costs, and higher patient satisfaction. EDOU growth is limited by existing policy barriers that prevent a "two-service" model of separate professional billing for both emergency and observation services. The majority of EDOUs use the "one-service" model, where a single composite professional fee is billed for both emergency and observation services. The financial implications of these models are not well understood. METHODS: We created a Monte Carlo simulation by building a model that reflects current clinical practice in the United States and uses inputs gathered from the most recently available peer-reviewed literature, national survey, and payer data. Using this simulation, we modeled annual staffing costs and payments for professional services under two common models of care in an EDOU. We also modeled cash flows over a continuous range of daily EDOU patient encounters to illustrate the dynamic relationship between costs and revenue over various staffing levels. RESULTS: We estimate the mean (±SD) annual net cash flow to be a net loss of $315,382 (±$89,635) in the one-service model and a net profit of $37,569 (±$359,583) in the two-service model. The two-service model is financially sustainable at daily billable encounters above 20, while in the one-service model, costs exceed revenue regardless of encounter count. Physician cost per hour and daily patient encounters had the most significant impact on model estimates. CONCLUSIONS: In the one-service model, EDOU staffing costs exceed payments at all levels of patient encounters, making a hospital subsidy necessary to create a financially sustainable practice. Professional groups seeking to staff and bill for both emergency and observation services are seldom able to do so due to EDOU size limitations and the regulatory hurdles that require setting up a separate professional group for each service. Policymakers and health care leaders should encourage universal adoption of EDOUs by removing restrictions and allowing the two-service model to be the standard billing option. These findings may inform planning and policy regarding observation services.

History, Principles, and Policies of Observation Medicine.

The history of observation medicine has paralleled the rise of emergency medicine over the past 50 years to meet the needs of patients, emergency departments, hospitals, and the US health care system. Just as emergency departments are the safety net of the health system, observation units are the safety net of emergency departments. The growth of observation medicine has been driven by innovations in health care, an ongoing shift of patients from inpatient to outpatient settings, and changes in health policy. These units have been shown to provide better outcomes than traditional care for selected patients.

Care of Neurologic Conditions in an Observation Unit.

As a group, neurologic conditions represent a substantial portion of emergency department (ED) visits. Cerebrovascular disease, headache, vertigo and seizures are all common reasons for patients to seek care in the ED. Patients being treated for each of these conditions are amenable to care in an ED observation unit (EDOU) if they require further diagnostic or therapeutic interventions beyond their ED stay. EDOUs are the ideal setting for patients who require advanced imaging such as MRIs, frequent neuro checks or specialist consultation in order to determine if they require admission or can be discharged home.

Tamsulosin does not increase 1-week passage rate of ureteral stones in ED patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to determine if tamsulosin initiated in the emergency department (ED) decreases the time to ureteral stone passage at 1 week or time to pain resolution, compared to placebo. METHODS: We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of tamsulosin vs placebo in ED patients with ureterolithiasis on computed tomography. Patients were identified and enrolled between April 2007 and February 2009 and were randomized to either 0.4 mg of tamsulosin or placebo for 1 week. We contacted participants using a telephone survey on post-ED visit days 1, 2, 3, and 7. The primary outcome was time to stone passage, with secondary outcomes being maximum pain score and amount of pain medication required. RESULTS: Of the 127 patients enrolled during this study, 15 were lost to follow-up, and 12 required surgical interventions before the 7-day mark, leaving 100 patients for analysis. Of the 100 patients, 53 received tamsulosin and 47 received placebo. There was no difference between groups in percentage of male, mean age, initial serum creatinine, average stone size, stone location, and history of prior stone. The probability that the patient did not pass a stone at 7 days was not different between tamsulosin and placebo, 62.1% (95% confidence interval, 49.1%-75.1%) vs 54.4% (95% confidence interval, 40.3%-68.6%; P = .58). There was no significant difference in the high pain score (P = .12) or hydrocodone/acetaminophen intake (P = .76) between treatment groups at any of the time points. CONCLUSION: This study reveals no difference in the proportion of stone passage or high pain score and pain medication utilization at 7 days between tamsulosin and placebo.

Factors associated with prolonged observation services stays and the impact of long stays on patient cost.

BACKGROUND: Patients are treated using observation services (OS) when their care needs exceed standard outpatient care (i.e., clinic or emergency department) but do not qualify for admission. Medicare and other private payers seek to limit this care setting to 48 hours. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data from 10 states and data collected from two additional states for 2009. STUDY DESIGN: Bivariate analyses and hierarchical linear modeling were used to examine patient- and hospital-level predictors of OS stays exceeding 48 (and 72) hours (prolonged OS). Hierarchical models were used to examine the additional cost associated with longer OS stays. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Of the 696,732 patient OS stays, 8.8 percent were for visits exceeding 48 hours. Having Medicaid or no insurance, a condition associated with no OS treatment protocol, and being discharged to skilled nursing were associated with having a prolonged OS stay. Among Medicare patients, the mean charge for OS stays was $10,373. OS visits of 48-72 hours were associated with a 42 percent increase in costs; visits exceeding 72 hours were associated with a 61 percent increase in costs. CONCLUSION: Patient cost sharing for most OS stays of less than 24 hours is lower than the Medicare inpatient deductible. However, prolonged OS stays potentially increase this cost sharing.

Protocol-driven emergency department observation units offer savings, shorter stays, and reduced admissions.

Many patients who seek emergency department (ED) treatment are not well enough for immediate discharge but are not clearly sick enough to warrant full inpatient admission. These patients are increasingly treated as outpatients using observation services. Hospitals employ four basic approaches to observation services, which can be categorized by the presence or absence of a dedicated observation unit and of defined protocols. To understand which approach might have the greatest impact, we compared 2010 data from three sources: a case study of observation units in Atlanta, Georgia; statewide discharge data for Georgia; and national survey and discharge data. Compared to patients receiving observation services elsewhere in the hospital, patients cared for in "type 1" observation units-dedicated units with defined protocols-have a 23-38 percent shorter length-of-stay, a 17-44 percent lower probability of subsequent inpatient admission, and $950 million in potential national cost savings each year. Furthermore, we estimate that 11.7 percent of short-stay inpatients nationwide could be treated in a type 1 unit, with possible savings of $5.5-$8.5 billion annually. Policy makers should have hospitals report the setting in which observation services are provided and consider payment incentives for care in a type 1 unit.