Contextual Factors Influencing the Implementation of a Multifaceted Intervention to Improve Teamwork and Quality for Hospitalized Patients: A Multisite Qualitative Comparative Case Study.

BACKGROUND: Many hospitals have begun to implement models that combine interventions to redesign care for medical patients. These models include localization of physicians to specific units, nurse-physician co-leadership, and interprofessional rounds. Understanding contextual factors, the circumstances surrounding an implementation effort that influence its success, is essential to provide guidance to leaders implementing similar models of care. METHODS: A multisite qualitative comparative case study was conducted with four hospitals in the REdesigning SystEms to Improve Teamwork and Quality for Hospitalized Patients (RESET) study. Researchers conducted observations and semistructured interviews with 40 health care professionals and four implementation mentors. Researchers used inductive qualitative content analysis, reviewed fidelity of implementation trends, and performed cross-case analysis to identify contextual factors and their influence on implementation. RESULTS: Four contextual factors were associated with implementation success: (1) senior hospital leader involvement and organizational support; (2) alignment of RESET with organizational, hospital, and professional group priorities; (3) site leaders' engagement in RESET and relationship with one another; and (4) perceptions of need and intervention benefits among professionals. Implementation was optimal when senior leadership was stable and tangibly involved; organizational, hospital, and group goals were aligned; site leaders were committed and collaborated well; and nurses and physicians perceived a need for and benefits from the interventions. CONCLUSION: Four interrelated contextual factors are associated with the implementation of combined interventions to redesign care for hospitalized medical patients. Hospital leaders should consider these findings prior to implementing similar interventions and be prepared to address challenges related to these factors during implementation.

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.

Co-designing and piloting educational materials with patients and healthcare providers for syncope in the emergency department.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and design interventions to promote adherence to 2017 Guideline for Syncope Evaluation and Management. Methods: Focus groups and interviews were conducted to understand preferences, needs and barriers from patients and providers. Educational materials for patients were developed following a co-design, iterative process with patients, providers and hospital staff. The academic medical center's (AMC) Patient Education Department and Patient & Family Advisory Council reviewed materials to ensure health literacy. We piloted usability and feasibility of delivering the materials to a small cohort of patients. Results: From Feb to March 2020, 24 patients were asked to watch the video. Twenty-two watched the intake video; of those 8 watched the discharge video. 95% of participants found the intake video informational and 86% would recommend it to others; 100% found the discharge video informational and would recommend it to others. Patients who watched both videos reported the videos improved their overall stay. Conclusion: Our study described a patient-clinician-researcher codesign process and demonstrated feasibility of tools developed to communicate risk and uncertainty with patients and facilitate shared decision making in syncope evaluation. Innovation: Engaging end users in developing interventions is critical for sustained practice change.

Development of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC): Implementing 21 Components to Catalyze Statewide Improvement in Surgical Care.

INTRODUCTION: In 2014, 56 Illinois hospitals came together to form a unique learning collaborative, the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC). Our objectives are to provide an overview of the first three years of ISQIC focused on (1) how the collaborative was formed and funded, (2) the 21 strategies implemented to support quality improvement (QI), (3) collaborative sustainment, and (4) how the collaborative acts as a platform for innovative QI research. METHODS: ISQIC includes 21 components to facilitate QI that target the hospital, the surgical QI team, and the peri-operative microsystem. The components were developed from available evidence, a detailed needs assessment of the hospitals, reviewing experiences from prior surgical and non-surgical QI Collaboratives, and interviews with QI experts. The components comprise 5 domains: guided implementation (e.g., mentors, coaches, statewide QI projects), education (e.g., process improvement (PI) curriculum), hospital- and surgeon-level comparative performance reports (e.g., process, outcomes, costs), networking (e.g., forums to share QI experiences and best practices), and funding (e.g., for the overall program, pilot grants, and bonus payments for improvement). RESULTS: Through implementation of the 21 novel ISQIC components, hospitals were equipped to use their data to successfully implement QI initiatives and improve care. Formal (QI/PI) training, mentoring, and coaching were undertaken by the hospitals as they worked to implement solutions. Hospitals received funding for the program and were able to work together on statewide quality initiatives. Lessons learned at one hospital were shared with all participating hospitals through conferences, webinars, and toolkits to facilitate learning from each other with a common goal of making care better and safer for the surgical patient in Illinois. Over the first three years, surgical outcomes improved in Illinois. DISCUSSION: The first three years of ISQIC improved care for surgical patients across Illinois and allowed hospitals to see the value of participating in a surgical QI learning collaborative without having to make the initial financial investment themselves. Given the strong support and buy-in from the hospitals, ISQIC has continued beyond the initial three years and continues to support QI across Illinois hospitals.

What works in medication reconciliation: an on-treatment and site analysis of the MARQUIS2 study.

BACKGROUND: The second Multicenter Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement Study demonstrated a marked reduction in medication discrepancies per patient. The aim of the current analysis was to determine the association of patient exposure to each system-level intervention and receipt of each patient-level intervention on these results. METHODS: This study was conducted at 17 North American Hospitals, the study period was 18 months per site, and sites typically adopted interventions after 2-5 months of preintervention data collection. We conducted an on-treatment analysis (ie, an evaluation of outcomes based on patient exposure) of system-level interventions, both at the category level and at the individual component level, based on monthly surveys of implementation site leads at each site (response rate 65%). We then conducted a similar analysis of patient-level interventions, as determined by study pharmacist review of documented activities in the medical record. We analysed the association of each intervention on the adjusted number of medication discrepancies per patient in admission and discharge orders, based on a random sample of up to 22 patients per month per site, using mixed-effects Poisson regression with hospital site as a random effect. We then used a generalised linear mixed-effects model (GLMM) decision tree to determine which patient-level interventions explained the most variance in discrepancy rates. RESULTS: Among 4947 patients, patient exposure to seven of the eight system-level component categories was associated with modest but significant reductions in discrepancy rates (adjusted rate ratios (ARR) 0.75-0.97), as were 15 of the 17 individual system-level intervention components, including hiring, reallocating and training personnel to take a best possible medication history (BPMH) and training personnel to perform discharge medication reconciliation and patient counselling. Receipt of five of seven patient-level interventions was independently associated with large reductions in discrepancy rates, including receipt of a BPMH in the emergency department (ED) by a trained clinician (ARR 0.40, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.43), admission medication reconciliation by a trained clinician (ARR 0.57, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.64) and discharge medication reconciliation by a trained clinician (ARR 0.64, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.73). In GLMM decision tree analyses, patients who received both a BPMH in the ED and discharge medication reconciliation by a trained clinician experienced the lowest discrepancy rates (0.08 per medication per patient). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Patient-level interventions most associated with reductions in discrepancies were receipt of a BPMH of admitted patients in the ED and admission and discharge medication reconciliation by a trained clinician. System-level interventions were associated with modest reduction in discrepancies for the average patient but are likely important to support patient-level interventions and may reach more patients. These findings can be used to help hospitals and health systems prioritise interventions to improve medication safety during care transitions.

Spatial analysis of community service availability in rural Kentucky, United States.

This study examined community service provider (CSP) availability relative to neighborhood socioeconomic status and its association with health-related social needs in Eastern Kentucky, United States. We used GIS methods to generate 10-mile network service areas around addresses of 736 CSPs and 10,161 Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries screened August 2018-April 2020 in 27-county study region. We observed wide variation in CSP availability and an inverse relationship between CSP availability and rates of unemployment, poverty, and federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The CSPs appear to have higher availability in more affluent census block groups. We found a statistically significant negative relationship between CSP availability within 10 miles of a beneficiary's resident and the presence of food, housing, transportation needs. Our findings suggest that healthcare providers, government entities, and non-profit organizations should consider geographic accessibility to those most in need when making referral and funding decisions, particularly in rural communities.

Perspectives of acute, post-acute, physician and community support providers on community collaborative efforts to improve transitions of care.

BACKGROUND: Transitional care (TC) involves multiple organizations as patients transition from hospitals. Collaboration to reduce readmissions has been encouraged by government initiatives. As part of Project ACHIEVE, a comparative TC study, we sought provider perspectives on TC improvement efforts. METHODS: We aimed to identify perceived problems that drove improvement efforts, influences on interventions implemented, facilitators or barriers to desired outcomes, and sustainability. Investigators interviewed 63 representatives from collaborative improvement efforts across 13 states in 2015. Directed content analysis was performed, with inductive coding as insights emerged. Data was also analyzed for differences in participant perceptions, such as the organization represented, geographic characteristics, and source of funding for interventions. RESULTS: Participants in semi-structured interviews included physicians, nurses, care navigators, and administrators from hospitals, nursing facilities, community-based organizations, and medical practices. Participants reported that changing reimbursement practices and readmissions penalties drove TC efforts, and common problems they sought to address included insufficient inter-provider communication, medication management, and challenges related to chronic condition management. Solutions implemented were often adapted according to community and setting characteristics and population factors. Findings also suggest differences in the types of interventions implemented according to funding sources, which also impacted the ability to sustain these interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-site collaboration, communication, and partnership among stakeholders is essential to effective transitional care. Collaboration led to shared understanding among stakeholders of health care and support services available in the community. Coalition-based work also facilitated trust among partners which led to expansion and sustainment of TC efforts. Unmet social needs of patients are a barrier. IMPLICATIONS: Opportunities exist for increased and improved collaboration among clinical providers with community-based and social services organizations. Increased involvement of primary care providers in such collaborations would improve communication with both the patient and involved providers. Communities with external funding were more likely to implement evidence-based interventions, while those relying on institutional support addressed identified problems with more targeted interventions.

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 a Medication Reconciliation Risk Stratification Tool Integrated within an electronic health record: A Case Series of Three Academic Medical Centers.

Medication errors during transitions of care are common, dangerous and costly. Medication reconciliation can help mitigate this risk, but it is a complex and time-consuming process when performed properly. Increasingly, pharmacy staff have been engaged to help improve medication reconciliation. However, many organizations lack the resources and staff required to perform accurate medication histories and other reconciliation tasks on all patients. We describe how three academic medical centers implemented risk scoring systems to allocate limited pharmacy resources to patients with the highest likelihood of medication reconciliation related errors. We found that (1) development of a tailored medication risk scoring system and integration into the electronic health record is feasible, (2) workflow around the risk calculator is critical to the success of the implementation, and (3) the complex coordination of professional disciplines during the medication reconciliation process remains an ongoing challenge at all three institutions.

Bedside Nurses' Perceptions of Effective Nurse-Physician Communication in General Medical Units: A Qualitative Study.

Background There is a dearth of research on successful interventions to improve nurse-physician communication (NPC). An important step is identifying what matters to bedside nurses and their perceptions of effective NPC communications and actions. Methods We conducted three focus groups with a total of 19 medical unit nurses across two hospitals in one academic medical center in the United States. Using a convenience sampling strategy, five to eight nurses voluntarily participated in each focus group. The recording was transcribed verbatim and two independent coders performed coding and resolved any discrepancies in codes. Qualitative content analysis was pursued to identify themes and associated quotes. Results The presence of direct communication between physicians and nurses was identified as the first theme and perceived by nurses as very important. Additional themes related to physician communication and attributes emerged including collegiality and respect (e.g., engaging nurses as partners in patient care), attentiveness and responsiveness (e.g., listening carefully and addressing concerns), and directness and support (e.g., backing nurses up in difficult situations). Effective NPC is further facilitated by organizational structure, relationship development separate from patient care, and consistent/timely use of technology. Conclusions Hospital bedside nurses provided valuable insight into improved physician communication and what attributes contribute to more effective NPC. Most importantly, they emphasized the significance of physicians in supporting them with difficult patients.

Patterns of utilization and evaluation of advanced practice providers on academic hospital medicine teams: A national survey.

This survey study aimed to provide a contemporary appraisal of advanced practice provider (APP) practice and to summarize perceptions of the benefits and challenges of integrating APPs into adult academic hospital medicine (HM) groups. We surveyed leaders of academic HM groups. We received responses from 43 of 86 groups (50%) surveyed. Thirty-four (79%) reported that they employed APPs. In most groups (85%), APPs were reported to perform daily tasks of patient care, including rounding and documentation. Less than half of the groups reported that APPs had completed HM-specific postgraduate training. The reported benefits of APPs included improved perceived quality of care and greater volume of patients that could be seen. Reported challenges included training requirements and support for new hires. Further investigation is needed to determine which APP team structures deliver the highest quality care. There may be a role for expanding standardized competency-based postgraduate training for APPs planning to practice HM.

Information exchange among providers and patient-centeredness in transitional care: A five-year retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Responding to the shift toward value-based care, hospitals engaged in widespread experimentation of implementing transitional care (TC) strategies to improve patient experience and reduce unnecessary readmissions. However, which groups of these strategies are most strongly associated with better outcomes remains unknown. METHODS: Using a retrospective longitudinal design, we collected hospitals' TC strategy implementation data for 370 U S. hospitals and obtained claims data for 2.4 million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized at them from 2009 to 2014. We applied estimated mixed-effects regression models controlling for patient, hospital, and community covariates to assess relationships between TC strategy groups and trends in hospitals' 30-day hospital readmissions, with observation stay and mortality rates as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Hospitals' adoption of TC groups was associated with higher readmission rates at baseline and larger readmission rate reductions compared to not adopting any of 5 TC groups. The TC group including timely information exchange across care settings, engaging patients and caregivers in education, and/or identifying and addressing patients' transition needs was associated with the largest reductions. Hospitals not implementing any of the 5 TC groups had higher mortality rates and lower observation stay rates throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that timely information sharing among providers across the care continuum and engaging patients in discharge planning and education may correspond with reduced readmissions. IMPLICATIONS: Our research suggests that hospitals responded to shifts in policy by implementing a diversity of TC strategy combinations; it also provides guidance regarding which combinations of TC strategies corresponded with larger readmission reductions.

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.

Effects of a refined evidence-based toolkit and mentored implementation on medication reconciliation at 18 hospitals: results of the MARQUIS2 study.

BACKGROUND: The first Multicenter Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement (QI) Study (MARQUIS1) demonstrated that mentored implementation of a medication reconciliation best practices toolkit decreased total unintentional medication discrepancies in five hospitals, but results varied by site. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of a refined toolkit on a larger group of hospitals. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic quality improvement study (MARQUIS2) at 18 North American hospitals or hospital systems from 2016 to 2018. Incorporating lessons learnt from MARQUIS1, we implemented a refined toolkit, offering 17 system-level and 6 patient-level interventions. One of eight physician mentors coached each site via monthly calls and performed one to two site visits. The primary outcome was number of unintentional medication discrepancies in admission or discharge orders per patient. Time series analysis used multivariable Poisson regression. RESULTS: A total of 4947 patients were sampled, including 1229 patients preimplementation and 3718 patients postimplementation. Both the number of system-level interventions adopted per site and the proportion of patients receiving patient-level interventions increased over time. During the intervention, patients experienced a steady decline in their medication discrepancy rate from 2.85 discrepancies per patient to 0.98 discrepancies per patient. An interrupted time series analysis of the 17 sites with sufficient data for analysis showed the intervention was associated with a 5% relative decrease in discrepancies per month over baseline temporal trends (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 0.95, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97, p<0.001). Receipt of patient-level interventions was associated with decreased discrepancy rates, and these associations increased over time as sites adopted more system-level interventions. CONCLUSION: A multicentre medication reconciliation QI initiative using mentored implementation of a refined best practices toolkit, including patient-level and system-level interventions, was associated with a substantial decrease in unintentional medication discrepancies over time. Future efforts should focus on sustainability and spread.

Effects of Different Transitional Care Strategies on Outcomes after Hospital Discharge-Trust Matters, Too.

BACKGROUND: As health systems shift toward value-based care, strategies to reduce readmissions and improve patient outcomes become increasingly important. Despite extensive research, the combinations of transitional care (TC) strategies associated with best patient-centered outcomes remain uncertain. METHODS: Using an observational, prospective cohort study design, Project ACHIEVE sought to determine the association of different combinations of TC strategies with patient-reported and postdischarge health care utilization outcomes. Using purposive sampling, the research team recruited a diverse sample of short-term acute care and critical access hospitals in the United States (N = 42) and analyzed data on eligible Medicare beneficiaries (N = 7,939) discharged from their medical/surgical units. Using both hospital- and patient-reported TC strategy exposure data, the project compared patients "exposed" to each of five overlapping groups of TC strategies to their "control" counterparts. Primary outcomes included 30-day hospital readmissions, 7-day postdischarge emergency department (ED) visits and patient-reported physical and mental health, pain, and participation in daily activities. RESULTS: Participants averaged 72.3 years old (standard deviation =10.1), 53.4% were female, and most were White (78.9%). Patients exposed to one TC group (Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination) were less likely to have 30-day readmissions (risk ratio [RR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57-0.92, p < 0.001) or 7-day ED visits (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93, p < 0.001) and more likely to report excellent physical and mental health, greater participation in daily activities, and less pain (RR ranged from 1.11 to 1.15, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In concert with care coordination activities that bridge the transition from hospital to home, hospitals' clear communication and fostering of trust with patients were associated with better patient-reported outcomes and reduced health care utilization.

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.

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.