Factors that impact initiation of pain management agreements for patients on chronic opioid therapy.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis seeks to understand variables within our institution that impact pain management agreement (PMA) utilization for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP). DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Public academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adults prescribed an opioid for CNCP between July 2020 and October 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We assessed the association between patient demographics, prescription factors, and prescriber factors with the presence of a PMA. Unadjusted rates and chi-square tests were generated for each predictor. Additionally, we performed two multivariable logistic regressions: one including all variables and another utilizing a stepwise forward variable selection process to further understand the relationships between predictors and the presence of a PMA. RESULTS: 49.7 percent of patients who received an opioid for CNCP had a PMA on file. One significant predictor of the presence of PMA was prescriber specialty with anesthesia/pain medicine, demonstrating 88 percent compliance. Compared to anesthesia/pain medicine, patients receiving opioids from internal medicine had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.155 (95 percent confidence interval (CI), 0.109-0.220), while patients receiving opioids from family medicine had an OR of 0.122 (95 percent CI, 0.090-0.167). Additionally, patients who received schedule II opioids (as opposed to schedule III/IV opioids), patients with multiple opioid fills in 3 months, middle aged patients, and Black patients were more likely to have a PMA. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with PMA within our institution was only 49 percent despite an existing state law mandating use. Our analysis suggests quality improvement interventions should target patients on schedule III/IV opioids who receive their prescriptions from primary care providers.

Reducing the use of nil per os past midnight for inpatient diagnostic and therapeutic procedures: A quality improvement initiative.

BACKGROUND: Pre-procedural fasting (nil per os [NPO]) is a commonly implemented protocol to prevent aspiration during certain diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. However, evidence suggests aspiration risk is quite low. Current guidelines support a reduced fasting duration before procedures necessitating anesthesia or sedation, but many health systems persist in the use of NPO past midnight. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to reduce the use of NPO p MN before inpatient diagnostic and therapeutic procedures necessitating anesthesia or sedation by 50% within 6 months. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a quality improvement initiative at a single academic health system in Southeast Texas. We include the experience of patients of all ages across 4 affiliated hospitals (one main academic hospital and three community satellite hospitals). INTERVENTION: An interprofessional team was convened to review best practices and oversee this quality improvement initiative. Diagnostic imaging protocols previously requiring NPO were amended to reflect evidence-based fasting requirements. A pre-procedure clear liquid diet was also implemented. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: We describe the steps to implementation, feasibility of implementation as described through key process measures, and the safety of implementation (balancing measures). RESULTS: NPO requirements were removed from 70% of existing diagnostic imaging and therapeutic orders. After these amended protocols and the implementation of a pre-procedure clear liquid diet, we displayed an immediate 50% reduction in NPO past midnight usage. Further stakeholder engagement/education and targeted interventions reduced NPO past midnight usage to only 33% of pre-procedural diet orders. Surgery remains the most common indication for continued use of NPO. Aspiration events and procedural delays were rare.

Excess deaths from COVID-19 among Medicare beneficiaries with psychiatric diagnoses: Community versus nursing home.

BACKGROUND: Psychiatric illness may pose an additional risk of death for older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Older adults in the community versus institutions might be influenced by the pandemic differently. This study examines excess deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic among Medicare beneficiaries with and without psychiatric diagnoses (depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia) in the community versus nursing homes. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of a 20% random sample of 15,229,713 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, from January 2019 through December 2021. Unadjusted monthly mortality risks, COVID-19 infection rates, and case-fatality rates after COVID-19 diagnosis were calculated. Excess deaths in 2020, compared to 2019 were estimated from multivariable logistic regressions. RESULTS: Of all included Medicare beneficiaries in 2020 (N = 5,140,619), 28.9% had a psychiatric diagnosis; 1.7% lived in nursing homes. In 2020, there were 246,422 observed deaths, compared to 215,264 expected, representing a 14.5% increase over expected. Patients with psychiatric diagnoses had more excess deaths than those without psychiatric diagnoses (1,107 vs. 403 excess deaths per 100,000 beneficiaries, p < 0.01). The largest increases in mortality risks were observed among patients with schizophrenia (32.4% increase) and bipolar disorder (25.4% increase). The pandemic-associated increase in deaths with psychiatric diagnoses was only found in the community, not in nursing homes. The increased mortality for patients with psychiatric diagnoses was limited to those with medical comorbidities. The increase in mortality for psychiatric diagnoses was associated with higher COVID-19 infection rates (1-year infection rate = 7.9% vs. 4.2% in 2020), rather than excess case fatality. CONCLUSIONS: Excess deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic were disproportionally greater in beneficiaries with psychiatric diagnoses, at least in part due to higher infection rates. Policy interventions should focus on preventing COVID-19 infections and deaths among community-dwelling patients with major psychiatric disorders in addition to those living the nursing homes.

Hospitalizations and Mortality From Non-SARS-CoV-2 Causes Among Medicare Beneficiaries at US Hospitals During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.

Importance: The increased hospital mortality rates from non-SARS-CoV-2 causes during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic are incompletely characterized. Objective: To describe changes in mortality rates after hospitalization for non-SARS-CoV-2 conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic and how mortality varies by characteristics of the admission and hospital. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study from January 2019 through September 2021 using 100% of national Medicare claims, including 4626 US hospitals. Participants included 8 448 758 individuals with non-COVID-19 medical admissions with fee-for-service Medicare insurance. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome was mortality in the 30 days after admission with adjusted odds generated from a 3-level (admission, hospital, and county) logistic regression model that included diagnosis, demographic variables, comorbidities, hospital characteristics, and hospital prevalence of SARS-CoV-2. Results: There were 8 448 758 non-SARS-CoV-2 medical admissions in 2019 and from April 2020 to September 2021 (mean [SD] age, 73.66 [12.88] years; 52.82% women; 821 569 [11.87%] Black, 438 453 [6.34%] Hispanic, 5 351 956 [77.35%] White, and 307 218 [4.44%] categorized as other). Mortality in the 30 days after admission increased from 9.43% in 2019 to 11.48% from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021 (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.19-1.21) in multilevel logistic regression analyses including admission and hospital characteristics. The increase in mortality was maintained throughout the first 18 months of the pandemic and varied by race and ethnicity (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.30 for Black enrollees; OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.27 for Hispanic enrollees; and OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.17-1.19 for White enrollees); Medicaid eligibility (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.24-1.27 for Medicaid eligible vs OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.16-1.18 for noneligible); and hospital quality score, measured on a scale of 1 to 5 stars with 1 being the worst and 5 being the best (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.22-1.31 for 1 star vs OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.08-1.15 for 5 stars). Greater hospital prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was associated with greater increases in odds of death from the prepandemic period to the pandemic period; for example, comparing mortality in October through December 2020 with October through December 2019, the OR was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.39-1.49) for hospitals in the top quartile of SARS-CoV-2 admissions vs an OR of 1.19 (95% CI, 1.16-1.22) for admissions to hospitals in the lowest quartile. This association was mostly limited to admissions with high-severity diagnoses. Conclusions and Relevance: The prolonged elevation in mortality rates after hospital admission in 2020 and 2021 for non-SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses contrasts with reports of improvement in hospital mortality during 2020 for SARS-CoV-2. The results of this cohort study suggest that, with the continued impact of SARS-CoV-2, it is important to implement interventions to improve access to high-quality hospital care for those with non-SARS-CoV-2 diseases.

Feasibility and Effectiveness of a Quality Improvement Curriculum for Combined Medicine Subspecialty Fellows.

BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires training in quality improvement (QI) yet many programs struggle to incorporate appropriate content. Small fellowship programs may find it particularly difficult, limited by a lack of well-trained faculty. We report on the feasibility and effectiveness of a consolidated curriculum for subspecialty fellowship programs. METHODS: Two QI experts were identified to design a curriculum. Interactive didactic sessions were created to guide development and implementation of fellow QI projects. All projects culminated in abstract/poster presentation. RESULTS: Seven of 10 eligible fellowships participated. Twenty-four projects were completed with 70% reaching improvement in process measures. Trainees improved confidence in 11 of 12 QI domains. Program directors stated enhancement in QI education with 100% recommending program continuation. CONCLUSIONS: Consolidating teaching efforts with existing QI experts can lead to an effective QI curriculum for fellowship programs. This model can be expanded to other graduate medical education trainees as a means to increase QI proficiency.

Association of Inpatient Continuity of Care With Complications and Length of Stay Among Hospitalized Medicare Enrollees.

Importance: Continuity in primary care is associated with improved outcomes, but less information is available on the association of continuity of care in the hospital with hospital complications. Objective: To assess whether the number of hospitalists providing care is associated with subsequent hospital complications and length of stay. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used multilevel logistic regression models to analyze Medicare claims for medical admissions from 2016 to 2018 with a length of stay longer than 4 days. Admissions with multiple charges on the same day from a hospitalist or an intensive care unit (ICU) stay during hospital days 1 to 3 were excluded. The data were accessed and analyzed from November 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. Exposures: The number of different hospitalists who submitted charges during hospital days 1 to 3. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall length of stay and transfer to ICU or a new diagnosis of drug toxic effects on hospital day 4 or later. Results: Among the 617 680 admissions, 362 376 (58.7%) were women, with a mean (SD) age of 80.2 (8.4) years. In 306 037 admissions (49.6%), the same hospitalist provided care on days 1 to 3, while 2 hospitalists provided care in 274 658 admissions (44.5%), and 3 hospitalists provided care in 36 985 admissions (6.0%). There was no significant association between the number of different hospitalists on days 1 to 3 and either length of stay or subsequent ICU transfers. Admissions seeing 2 or 3 hospitalists had a slightly greater adjusted odds of subsequent new diagnoses of drug toxic effects (2 hospitalists: odds ratio [OR], 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07; 3 hospitalists: OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12). Conclusions and Relevance: There was little evidence that receiving care from multiple hospitalists was associated with worse outcomes for patients receiving all their general medical care from hospitalists.

Minimal trauma fractures: lifting the specter of misconduct by identifying risk factors and planning for prevention.

Minimal trauma fractures are an unfortunate, yet not uncommon, event for frail elderly individuals in long term care facilities. These fractures result in significant morbidity including pain and loss of function along with significantly increased mortality. Further concern exists for the medico-legal issues raised after a minimal trauma fracture is discovered. The controversy at hand is whether such fractures are primarily the result of inadequate, careless, or abusive care practices. We build a case to the contrary. Although the data regarding this condition are limited, there exists a reasonable evidence base to identify an at-risk patient population. We present a representative case and subsequent literature review of minimal trauma fractures to illustrate the condition, including risk factors, mode of presentation, and patient outcomes. No direct research has been conducted on the pathophysiology of these fractures. Extrapolating from other similar conditions and likely associated comorbid illnesses, we explore possible physiologic explanations for their occurrence. Again, no direct investigation into prevention or treatment of minimal trauma fractures has been published. Instead, we consider a variety of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions that may modify the risk for minimal trauma fractures considering the previously identified risk factors and probable pathophysiologic changes leading to fracture development. We propose that reducing minimal trauma fractures in the frail elderly nursing home population will require careful staff education, close attention to identify at-risk patients, and implementation of select interventions aimed at preventing such fractures.