Efficiency of the Japanese Hospitalist System for Patients with Urinary Tract Infection: A Propensity-matched Analysis.

Objective The hospitalist system in the United States has been considered successful in terms of the quality of care and cost effectiveness. In Japan, however, its efficacy has not yet been extensively examined. This study examined the impact of the hospitalist system on the quality of care and healthcare economics in a Japanese population using treatment of urinary tract infection as an example. Methods We analyzed 271 patients whose most resource-consuming diagnosis at admission was urinary tract infection between April 2017 and March 2019. Propensity-matched analyses were performed to compare health care economics and the quality of care between the hospitalist system and the conventional system. Results In matched pairs, care by the hospitalist system was associated with a significantly shorter length of stay than that by the conventional system. The quality of care (oral antibiotics switch rate, rate of appropriate antibiotics change based on urine or blood culture results, detection rate of urinary tract infection etiology and the number of laboratory tests) was also considered to be favorably impacted by the hospitalist system. Although not statistically significant, hospital costs tended to be lower with the hospitalist system than with the conventional system. The mortality rate and 30-day readmission were also not significantly different between the groups. Conclusion The hospitalist system had a favorable impact on the quality of care and length of stay without increasing readmission in patients with urinary tract infection. This study is further evidence of the strong potential for the positive impact of an implemented hospitalist system in Japan.

The cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole compared to voriconazole, the standard of care in the treatment of patients with invasive mould diseases, prior to differential pathogen diagnosis in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mould diseases are associated with high morbidity, mortality and economic impact. Its treatment is often started prior to differential pathogen diagnosis. Isavuconazole is approved for treatment of invasive aspergillosis (IA) and invasive mucormycosis (IM) when amphotericin-B is not indicated. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole vs voriconazole for the treatment of adult patients with possible IA prior to differential pathogen diagnosis, in Spain. METHODS: A decision tree analysis was performed using the Spanish Healthcare System perspective. Among all patients with possible IA, it was considered that 7.81% actually had IM. Costs for laboratory analysis, management of adverse events, hospitalisation and drugs per patient, deaths and long-term effects in life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) were considered. Efficacy data were obtained from clinical trials and utilities from the literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted. RESULTS: In patients with possible IA and when compared to voricanozole, isavuconazole showed an incremental cost of 4758.53€, besides an incremental effectiveness of +0.49 LYs and +0.41 QALYs per patient. The Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio was 9622.52€ per LY gained and 11,734.79€ per QALY gained. The higher cost of isavuconazole was due to drug acquisition. Main parameters influencing results were mortality, treatment duration and hospitalisation days. The PSA results showed that isavuconazole has a probability of being cost-effective of 67.34%, being dominant in 24.00% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Isavuconazole is a cost-effective treatment compared to voriconazole for patients with possible IA for a willingness to pay threshold of 25,000€ per additional QALY.

Comparison of Resident, Advanced Practice Clinician, and Hospitalist Teams in an Academic Medical Center: Association With Clinical Outcomes and Resource Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Academic medical centers have expanded their inpatient medicine services with advanced practice clinicians (APCs) or nonteaching hospitalists in response to patient volumes, residency work hour restrictions, and recently, COVID-19. Reports of clinical outcomes, cost, and resource utilization differ among inpatient team structures. OBJECTIVE: Directly compare outcomes among resident, APC, and solo hospitalist inpatient general medicine teams. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using multivariable analysis adjusted for time of admission, interhospital transfer, and comorbidities that compares clinical outcomes, cost, and resource utilization. SUBJECTS: Patients 18 years or older discharged from an inpatient medicine service between July 2015 and July 2018 (N = 12,716). MAIN MEASURES: Length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, inpatient mortality, normalized total direct cost, discharge time, and consultation utilization. KEY RESULTS: Resident teams admitted fewer patients at night (32.0%; P < .001) than did APC (49.5%) and hospitalist (48.6%) teams. APCs received nearly 4% more outside transfer patients (P = .015). Hospitalists discharged patients 26 minutes earlier than did residents (mean hours after midnight [95% CI], 14.58 [14.44-14.72] vs 15.02 [14.97-15.08]). Adjusted consult utilization was 15% higher for APCs (adjusted mean consults per admission [95% CI], 1.00 [0.96-1.03]) and 8% higher for residents (0.93 [0.90-0.95]) than it was for hospitalists (0.85 [0.80-0.90]). No differences in LOS, readmission, mortality, or cost were observed between the teams. CONCLUSION: We observed similar costs, LOS, 30-day readmission, and mortality among hospitalist, APC, and resident teams. Our results suggest clinical outcomes are not significantly affected by team structure. The addition of APC or hospitalist teams represent safe and effective alternatives to traditional inpatient resident teams.

Cost-utilization of peripheral intravenous cannulation in hospitalized adults: An observational study.

AIM: In modern healthcare there is increased focus on optimizing efficiency for every treatment or performed procedure, of which reduction of costs is an important part. With this study, authors aimed to calculate the cost of peripheral intravenous cannulation including all components that influence its price. METHODS: This observational cost-utilization study was conducted between May and October 2016. Hospitalized adults were included in this study, who received usual care. Peripheral intravenous cannulation was carried out according to current hospital protocols, based on international standards for peripheral intravenous catheter insertion. Device costs were assumed equal to the number of attempts multiplied by the fixed supply costs and applicable costs for additional attempts, whereas personnel costs for both nurses and physicians were based on their hourly salary. RESULTS: A total of 1512 patients were included in this study, with a mean of 1.37 (±0.77) attempts and a mean time of 3.5 (±2.7) min were needed for a successful catheter insertion. Adjusted mean costs for peripheral intravenous cannulation were estimated to be €11.67 for each patient, but costs increase as the number of attempts for successful cannulation increases. The cost for patients with a successful first attempt was lower, at approximately €9.32 but increased markedly to €65.34 when five attempts were needed. CONCLUSION: Prevention of multiple attempts may lower the costs, and furthermore, additional technologies applied by nurses to individual patients based on predicted difficult intravenous access will make the application of these additional technologies, in turn, more efficient.

Impact of the Hospitalist System in Japan on the Quality of Care and Healthcare Economics.

Objective The hospitalist system is considered successful with respect to the quality of care and cost effectiveness in the United States. Studies have consistently demonstrated an improved clinical efficiency with this system. In Japan, however, the efficacy of the hospitalist system has not yet been examined. As a "super-aged society", Japan has a high number of elderly patients with multiple comorbidities who may theoretically receive better care by the hospitalist system than by the conventional system. This study investigates the impact of the hospitalist system on the quality of care and healthcare economics in a Japanese population. Methods We analyzed 274 patients ≥65 years of age in whom the most resource-consuming diagnosis at admission was aspiration pneumonia over a 1-year period. We categorized patients as those managed by hospitalists and those managed by various departments (control group) and compared the groups. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias. Results For matched pairs, the length of hospital stay in the hospitalist group was shorter than that in the control group. Care by the hospitalist system was associated with significantly lower hospital costs. The quality of care (rate of switching from intravenous to oral antibiotics, duration of antibiotics therapy, number of chest X-rays and blood tests during hospitalization) was also considered to be favorably impacted by the hospitalist system. There was no statistically significant difference in the mortality rate or readmission rate between the groups. Conclusion This study showed that the hospitalist system had a favorable impact on the quality of care and cost effectiveness, suggesting the potential utility of its implementation in the Japanese medical system.

Collaboration, Not Calculation: A Qualitative Study of How Hospital Executives Value Hospital Medicine Groups.

BACKGROUND: Hospital medicine groups (HMGs) typically receive financial support from hospitals. Determining a fair amount of financial support requires negotiation between HMG and hospital leaders. As the hospital medicine care model evolves, hospital leaders may regularly challenge HMGs to demonstrate the financial value of activities that do not directly generate revenue. OBJECTIVE: To describe current attitudes and beliefs of hospital executives regarding the value of contributions made by HMGs. DESIGN: Thematic content analysis of key informant interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four healthcare institutional leaders, including hospital presidents, chief medical officers, chief executive officers, and chief financial officers. Participants comprised a diverse sample from all regions in the United States, including rural, suburban, and urban locations, and academic and nonacademic institutions. RESULTS: Executives highly valued hospitalist groups that demonstrate alignment with hospital priorities, and often used this concept to summarize the HMG's success across several value domains. Most executives evaluated only a few key HMG metrics, but almost no executives reported calculating the HMG return on investment by summing pertinent quantitative contributions. Respondents described an evolving concept of hospitalist value and believed that HMGs generate substantial value that is difficult to measure financially. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital executives appear to make financial support decisions based on a small number of basic financial or care quality metrics combined with a subjective assessment of the HMG's broader alignment with hospital priorities. HMG leaders should focus on building relationships that facilitate dialog about alignment with hospital needs.

Demonstrating value: association of cost and quality outcomes with implementation of a value-driven oncology-hospitalist inpatient collaboration for patients with lung cancer.

The hospitalist model of care has gained favour in many hospital systems for the value, cost-effectiveness and quality of care that hospitalists provide. Hospitalists are experts in high-acuity medical problems of patients and they are intimately knowledgeable about hospital operations that enable efficiency of patient care. This results in tremendous cost-savings for institutions especially since hospitalists are also obligated to be involved in quality and practice improvement initiatives. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center employs oncology-hospitalists for many of their patients with cancer needing inpatient services. This physician team has expertise in both cancer-related and comorbidity-related reasons for hospitalisation. In September 2015, the thoracic and head and neck medical oncology team started a collaboration with the Oncology Hospitalist team whereby a proportion of patients with thoracic malignancies were directly admitted to hospitalists for inpatient care. To determine the value of this collaboration, a pre- and post- implementation study was done to compare quality outcomes such as readmission rates and length of stay (LOS) between the two groups. Adjusted outcomes showed that readmission rates were similar for both physician groups both at baseline and after implementation of the collaborative (p=0.680 and p=0.840, respectively). Median LOS was similar for both groups at baseline (4 days) and was not significantly different post-implementation (4vs5 days, p=0.07). The adjusted cost of a hospitalisation was also similar for hospitalist encounters and thoracic oncology encounters. This initial study showed that quality of care remained comparable for patients with lung cancer who were admitted to either service. With possibly shorter LOS but comparable readmission outcomes and adjusted cost for patients discharged from the hospitalist service, there is a strong value benefit for the implemented Thoracic Oncology-Hospitalist inpatient collaborative.

An Advanced Practice Provider Clinical Fellowship as a Pipeline to Staffing a Hospitalist Program.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 83% of hospitalist groups around the country utilize advanced practice providers; however, the demand for hospitalists continues to exceed the supply, and this has led to increased utilization of advanced practice providers in hospital medicine. Advanced practice providers receive very limited inpatient training, and there is wide variation in their clinical abilities after graduation. OBJECTIVE: To determine if an advanced practice provider fellowship is a cost-effective pipeline for filling vacancies within a hospitalist program. METHODS: In 2014, a one-year advanced practice providers clinical fellowship in hospital medicine was established. Working one-on-one with an experienced hospitalist faculty member, the fellows evaluate and manage patients. The program consists of 80% clinical experience, in the inpatient setting, and 20% didactic instruction. Up to four fellows are accepted each year and are eligible for hire, after training, if there are vacancies. RESULTS: The duration of onboarding and cost to the division were significantly reduced after implementation of the program (25.4 vs 11.0 weeks, P = .017 and $361,714 vs $66,000, P = .004). CONCLUSION: The advanced practice provider fellowship has proven beneficial for the hospitalist division by (1) reducing costs associated with having unfilled vacancies, (2) improving capacity on the hospitalist service, and (3) providing a pipeline for filling nurse practitioners (NP) and physician assistant (PA) vacancies on the hospitalist service.

Association between physician US News & World Report medical school ranking and patient outcomes and costs of care: observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the US News & World Report (USNWR) ranking of the medical school a physician attended is associated with patient outcomes and healthcare spending. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Medicare, 2011-15. PARTICIPANTS: 20% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older (n=996 212), who were admitted as an emergency to hospital with a medical condition and treated by general internists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Association between the USNWR ranking of the medical school a physician attended and the physician's patient outcomes (30 day mortality and 30 day readmission rates) and Medicare Part B spending, adjusted for patient and physician characteristics and hospital fixed effects (which effectively compared physicians practicing within the same hospital). A sensitivity analysis employed a natural experiment by focusing on patients treated by hospitalists, because patients are plausibly randomly assigned to hospitalists based on their specific work schedules. Alternative rankings of medical schools based on social mission score or National Institute of Health (NIH) funding were also investigated. RESULTS: 996 212 admissions treated by 30 322 physicians were examined for the analysis of mortality. When using USNWR primary care rankings, physicians who graduated from higher ranked schools had slightly lower 30 day readmission rates (adjusted rate 15.7% for top 10 schools v 16.1% for schools ranked ≥50; adjusted risk difference 0.4%, 95% confidence interval 0.1% to 0.8%; P for trend=0.005) and lower spending (adjusted Part B spending $1029 (£790; €881) v $1066; adjusted difference $36, 95% confidence interval $20 to $52; P for trend <0.001) compared with graduates of lower ranked schools, but no difference in 30 day mortality. When using USNWR research rankings, physicians graduating from higher ranked schools had slightly lower healthcare spending than graduates from lower ranked schools, but no differences in patient mortality or readmissions. A sensitivity analysis restricted to patients treated by hospitalists yielded similar findings. Little or no relation was found between alternative rankings (based on social mission score or NIH funding) and patient outcomes or costs of care. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, little or no relation was found between the USNWR ranking of the medical school from which a physician graduated and subsequent patient mortality or readmission rates. Physicians who graduated from highly ranked medical schools had slightly lower spending than graduates of lower ranked schools.

The Impact of Hospitalists on Value-Based Purchasing Program Scores.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As part of the provisions of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services adjusts payments made to hospitals through its Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program. In light of the increasing aim to improve efficiency, healthcare organizations are exploring innovative strategies for care delivery, including the use of hospitalists. Supporters of the hospitalist model suggest use of these specialists offers several advantages over the traditional model of physician care in the inpatient setting, including improved coordination, reduced costs, and improved quality indicator scores. This study explores the effect of hospitalists on hospitals' scores in the four domains of the fiscal year 2016 HVBP program: clinical process of care, patient experience of care (PEOC), outcome, and efficiency. Data from the 2015 HVBP database, the 2015 Medicare Final Rule Standardizing File, and the 2015 American Hospital Association database were used for the analysis. The study used multivariate regression analysis in Stata 12. Results from this study suggest that hospitals employing a higher percentage of hospitalists see related improvement in their overall total performance score. In light of improvements within the PEOC, outcome, and efficiency scores, it would appear that hospitalists are primarily providing linking services, which helps provide better coordination of care that is otherwise lacking in more traditionally fragmented approaches to care.

Hospitalist Value in an ACO World.

The accountable care organization (ACO) concept is advocated as a promising value-based payment model that could successfully realign the current payment system to financially reward improvements in quality and efficiency. Focusing on the care of hospitalized patients and controlling a substantive portion of variable hospital expenses, hospitalists are poised to play an essential role in system-level transformational change to achieve clinical integration. Especially through hospital and health system quality improvement (QI) initiatives, hospitalists can directly impact and share accountability for measures ranging from care coordination to implementation of evidence-based care and the patient and family caregiver experience. Regardless of political terrain, financial constraints in healthcare will foster continued efforts to promote formation of ACOs that aim to deliver coordinated, evidence-based, and patient-centered care. Hospitalists possess the clinical experience of caring for complex patients with multiple comorbidities and the QI skills needed to lead efforts in this new ACO era.

Dermatology hospital fellowships: present and future.

The question of what makes a successful dermatology hospitalist has risen to the forefront due to the rapidly increasing number of these providers. Inpatient dermatology fellowships have formed as a direct consequence. Though mostly in their infancy, these programs have primary or secondary goals to train providers in the dermatologic care of the hospitalized patient. This article presents a brief synopsis of the history of traditional hospitalist fellowships and extrapolates these findings to existing hospitalist dermatology fellowships. As more of these programs arise, these fellowships are poised to revolutionize dermatologic inpatient care from a systems perspective.

Quality of care delivered by general internists in US hospitals who graduated from foreign versus US medical schools: observational study.

OBJECTIVE:  To determine whether patient outcomes differ between general internists who graduated from a medical school outside the United States and those who graduated from a US medical school. DESIGN:  Observational study. SETTING:  Medicare, USA. PARTICIPANTS:  20% national sample of data for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older admitted to hospital with a medical condition in 2011-14 and treated by international or US medical graduates who were general internists. The study sample for mortality analysis included 1 215 490 admissions to the hospital treated by 44 227 general internists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:  Patients' 30 day mortality and readmission rates, and costs of care per hospital admission, with adjustment for patient and physician characteristics and hospital fixed effects (effectively comparing physicians within the same hospital). As a sensitivity analysis, we focused on physicians who specialize in the care of patients admitted to hospital ("hospitalists"), who typically work in shifts and whose patients are plausibly quasi-randomized based on the physicians' work schedules. RESULTS:  Compared with patients treated by US graduates, patients treated by international graduates had slightly more chronic conditions. After adjustment for patient and physician characteristics and hospital fixed effects, patients treated by international graduates had lower mortality (adjusted mortality 11.2% v 11.6%; adjusted odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 0.96; P<0.001) and slightly higher costs of care per admission (adjusted costs $1145 (£950; €1080) v $1098; adjusted difference $47, 95% confidence interval $39 to $55, P<0.001). Readmission rates did not differ between the two types of graduates. Similar differences in patient outcomes were observed among hospitalists. Differences in patient mortality were not explained by differences in length of stay, spending level, or discharge location. CONCLUSIONS:  Data on older Medicare patients admitted to hospital in the US showed that patients treated by international graduates had lower mortality than patients cared for by US graduates.

No Variation in Patient Care Outcomes After Implementation of Resident Shift Work Duty Hour Limitations and a Hospitalist Model System.

This study examines whether implementing a resident shift work schedule (RSWS) alone or combined with a hospitalist-led model system (HMS/RSWS) affects patient care outcomes or costs at a pediatric tertiary care teaching hospital. A retrospective sample compared pre- and postintervention groups for the most common primary discharge diagnoses, including asthma and cellulitis (RSWS intervention) and inflammatory bowel disease and diabetic ketoacidosis (HMS/RSWS intervention). Outcome variables included length of stay, number of subspecialty consultations, and hospitalization charges. For the RSWS intervention, the preintervention (n = 107) and postintervention (n = 92) groups showed no difference in any of the outcome variables. For the HMS/RSWS intervention, the preintervention (n = 98) and postintervention (n = 69) groups did not differ in demographics or length of stay. However, subspecialty consultations increased significantly during postintervention from 0.83 to 1.52 consults/hospitalization ( P < .01) without significantly increasing hospitalization charges. Neither the RSWS nor HMS/RSWS intervention affected patient care outcomes at a pediatric tertiary care teaching hospital.

Vascular surgeon-hospitalist comanagement improves in-hospital mortality at the expense of increased in-hospital cost.

OBJECTIVE: We have shown that vascular surgeon- hospitalist co management resulted in improved in-hospital mortality rates. We now aim to assess the impact of the hospitalist co management service (HCS) on healthcare cost. METHODS: A total of 1558 patients were divided into three cohorts and compared: 516 in 2012, 525 in 2013, and 517 in 2014. The HCS began in January 2013. Data were standardized for six vascular surgeons that were present 2012-2014. New attendings were excluded. Ten hospitalists participated. Case mix index (CMI), contribution margin, total hospital charges (THCs), length of stay (LOS), actual direct costs (ADCs), and actual variable indirect costs (AVICs) were compared. Analysis of variance with post-hoc tests, t-tests, and linear regressions were performed. RESULTS: THC rose by a mean difference of $14,578.31 between 2012 and 2014 (P < .001) with a significant difference found between all groups during the study period (P = .0004). ADC increased more than AVIC; however, both significantly increased over time (P = .0002 and P = .014, respectively). A mean $3326.63 increase in ADC was observed from 2012 to 2014 (P < .0001). AVIC only increased by an average $392.86 during the study period (P = .01). This increased cost was observed in the context of a higher CMI and longer LOS. CMI increased from 2.25 in 2012 to 2.53 in 2014 (P = .006). LOS increased by a mean 1.02 days between 2012 and 2014 (P = .016), and significantly during the study period overall (P = .018). After adjusting for CMI, LOS increases by only 0.61 days between 2012 and 2014 (P = .07). In a final regression model, THC is independently predicted by comanagement, CMI, and LOS. After adjusting for CMI and LOS, the increase in THC because of comanagement (2012 vs 2014) accounts for only $4073.08 of the total increase (P < .001). During this time, 30-day readmission rates decreased by ∼7% (P = .005), while related 30-day readmission rates decreased by ∼2% (P = .32). Physician contribution margin remained unchanged over the 3-year period (P = .76). The most prevalent diagnosis-related group was consistent across all years. Variation in the principal diagnosis code was observed with the prevalence of circulatory disorders because of type II diabetes replacing atherosclerosis with gangrene as the most prevalent diagnosis in 2013 and 2014 compared with 2012. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital cost is significantly higher since the start of the HCS. This surge may relate to increased CMI, LOS, and improved coding. This increase in cost may be justified as we have observed sustained reduction in in-hospital mortality and slightly improved readmission rates.

[Exposure to limited resources in the gastroenterology - results of a survey of hospital physicians]. / Umgang mit Mittelknappheit in der Gastroenterologie ­ Ergebnisse einer Befragung von Krankenhausärzten.

Background and research question: The hospital sector is currently characterized by a high economic pressure. As well the DRG system as the investment financing by the federal states imply financial limitations. Hospitals react to this situation by trying to reduce costs and to increase case volume. It is questionable whether and to what extent patient care and the working conditions of the physicians are affected by these circumstances. Especially, gastroenterological patients were considered to be insufficiently covered by the DRG system in the past. Therefore, this study focuses on the gastroenterology. Method: Based on prior studies and several semi-structured interviews with gastroenterologists working in hospitals a discipline-specific questionnaire was developed. Three versions of the questionnaire were differentiated to correspond to the respective experiences of the target population (chief physician, senior physician, assistant physician). All in all, 1751 members of the "Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie, Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten" (DGVS) were addressed. The questionnaire was answered by 642 participants resulting in a response rate of 36.7 %. The answers were interpreted by using descriptive and multivariate analyses. Results: A significant economic pressure is perceived by the participating gastroenterologists. This pressure manifests itself primary in perceived deficits in nursing care and human attention towards the patients. Moreover, the work satisfaction is negatively affected. Identified difficulties in the personnel recruitment can only be partially attributed to economic reasons. However, rationing of services is relatively seldom. Also, a financially-oriented overprovision is not perceived as a primary concern. In general, assistant physicians were a bit more skeptical about the situation in the gastroenterology, e. g. patient care, than the chief physicians. Conclusions: In total, the situation in the gastroenterology is similar to other stationary disciplines. However, in certain questions (e. g. increased surgery) differences are observed. Concerning perceived insufficient coverage of gastroenterologic services in the DRG system further projects should be initiated to improve coverage of these services.

Interhospital transfer patients discharged by academic hospitalists and general internists: Characteristics and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Prior work suggests interhospital transfer (IHT) may be a risky event. Outcomes for patients transferred from another acute care institution and discharged by hospitalists and general internists at academic health systems are not well described. OBJECTIVE: Investigate the characteristics and outcomes of IHT patients compared with patients admitted from the emergency department (ED) to academic health systems. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING/PATIENTS: A total of 885,392 adult inpatients discharged by hospitalists or general internal medicine physicians from 158 academic medical centers and affiliated hospitals participating in the University HealthSystem Consortium Clinical Database and Resource Manager from April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012. METHODS: Patient cohorts were defined by admission source: those from another acute care institution were IHTs, and those coming through the ED whose source of origination was not another hospital or ambulatory surgery site were ED admissions. In-hospital mortality was our primary outcome. We analyzed our data using descriptive statistics, t tests, χ(2) tests, and logistic regression. RESULTS: Compared with ED admissions, IHT patients had a longer average length of stay, higher proportion of time spent in the intensive care unit, higher costs per hospital day, lower frequency of discharges home, and higher inpatient mortality (4.1% vs 1.8%, P < 0.01). After adjusting for patient characteristics and risk of mortality measures, IHT patients had a higher risk of in-hospital death (odds ratio: 1.36, 95% confidence interval: 1.29-1.43). CONCLUSIONS: In this large national sample, IHT status is independently associated with inpatient mortality.

The Effects of a Hospitalist Comanagement Model for Joint Arthroplasty Patients in a Teaching Facility.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to compare postoperative medical comanagement of total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty patients using a hospitalist (H) and nonhospitalist (NH) model at a single teaching institution to determine the clinical and economic impact of the hospitalist comanagement. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 1656 patients who received hospitalist comanagement with 1319 patients who did not. The NH and H cohorts were compared at baseline via chi-square test for the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, the t test for age, and the Wilcoxon test for the unadjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index score and the age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index score. Chi-square test was used to compare the postoperative length of stay, readmission rate at 30 days after surgery, diagnoses present on admission, new diagnoses during admission, tests ordered postoperatively, total direct cost, and discharge location. RESULTS: The H cohort gained more new diagnoses (P < .001), had more studies ordered (P < .001), had a higher cost of hospitalization (P = .002), and were more likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility (P < .001). The H cohort also had a lower length of stay (P < .001), but we believe evolving techniques in both pain control and blood management likely influenced this. There was no significant difference in readmissions. CONCLUSION: Any potential benefit of a hospitalist comanagement model for this patient population may be outweighed by increased cost.