Pilot Randomized Trial of a Transdisciplinary Geriatric and Palliative Care Intervention for Older Adults With Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oncologists often struggle with managing the unique care needs of older adults with cancer. This study sought to determine the feasibility of delivering a transdisciplinary intervention targeting the geriatric-specific (physical function and comorbidity) and palliative care (symptoms and prognostic understanding) needs of older adults with advanced cancer. METHODS: Patients aged ≥65 years with incurable gastrointestinal or lung cancer were randomly assigned to a transdisciplinary intervention or usual care. Those in the intervention arm received 2 visits with a geriatrician, who addressed patients' palliative care needs and conducted a geriatric assessment. We predefined the intervention as feasible if >70% of eligible patients enrolled in the study and >75% of eligible patients completed study visits and surveys. At baseline and week 12, we assessed patients' quality of life (QoL), symptoms, and communication confidence. We calculated mean change scores in outcomes and estimated intervention effect sizes (ES; Cohen's d) for changes from baseline to week 12, with 0.2 indicating a small effect, 0.5 a medium effect, and 0.8 a large effect. RESULTS: From February 2017 through June 2018, we randomized 62 patients (55.9% enrollment rate [most common reason for refusal was feeling too ill]; median age, 72.3 years; cancer types: 56.5% gastrointestinal, 43.5% lung). Among intervention patients, 82.1% attended the first visit and 79.6% attended both. Overall, 89.7% completed all study surveys. Compared with usual care, intervention patients had less QoL decrement (-0.77 vs -3.84; ES = 0.21), reduced number of moderate/severe symptoms (-0.69 vs +1.04; ES = 0.58), and improved communication confidence (+1.06 vs -0.80; ES = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot trial, enrollment exceeded 55%, and >75% of enrollees completed all study visits and surveys. The transdisciplinary intervention targeting older patients' unique care needs showed encouraging ES estimates for enhancing patients' QoL, symptom burden, and communication confidence.

Effects of a perioperative geriatric intervention for older adults with Cancer: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with gastrointestinal cancers undergoing surgery often experience poor outcomes, such as prolonged postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) use, hospital readmissions, and complications. Involvement of geriatricians in the care of older adults with cancer can improve outcomes. We conducted a randomized trial of a perioperative geriatric intervention (PERI-OP) in older patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing surgery. METHODS: From 9/2016-4/2019, we randomly assigned patients age ≥ 65 with gastrointestinal cancer planning to undergo surgical resection to receive PERI-OP or usual care. Patients assigned to PERI-OP met with a geriatrician preoperatively in the outpatient setting and postoperatively as an inpatient consultant. The primary outcome was postoperative hospital LOS. Secondary outcomes included postoperative ICU use, 90-day hospital readmission rates, and complication rates. We conducted intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. RESULTS: ITT analyses included 137/160 patients who underwent surgery (usual care = 68/78, intervention = 69/82). PP analyses included the 68 usual care patients and the 30/69 intervention patients who received the preoperative and postoperative intervention components. ITT analyses demonstrated no significant differences between intervention and usual care in postoperative hospital LOS (7.23 vs 8.21 days, P = 0.374), ICU use (23.2% vs 32.4%, P = 0.257), 90-day hospital readmission rates (21.7% vs 25.0%, P = 0.690), or complication rates (17.4% vs 20.6%, P = 0.668). In PP analyses, intervention patients had shorter postoperative hospital LOS (5.90 vs 8.21 days, P = 0.024), but differences in ICU use (13.3% vs 32.4%, P = 0.081), 90-day hospital readmission rates (16.7% vs 25.0%, P = 0.439), and complication rates (6.7% vs 20.6%, P = 0.137) remained non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, PERI-OP did not have a significant impact on postoperative hospital LOS, ICU use, hospital readmissions, or complications. However, the subgroup who received PERI-OP as planned experienced encouraging results. Future studies of PERI-OP should include efforts, such as telehealth, to ensure the intervention is delivered as planned.

Information Sharing Practices Between US Hospitals and Skilled Nursing Facilities to Support Care Transitions.

Importance: Patient transitions from hospitals to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) require robust information sharing. After a decade of investment in health information technology infrastructure and new incentives to promote hospital-SNF coordination in the US, the current state of information sharing at this critical transition is unknown. Objective: To measure the completeness, timeliness, and usability of information shared by hospitals when discharging patients to SNFs, and to identify relational and structural characteristics associated with better hospital-SNF information sharing. Design, Setting, and Participants: Survey of 500 SNFs from a US nationally representative sample (265 respondents representing 471 hospital-SNF pairs; response rate of 53.0%) that collected detailed data on information sharing that supports care transitions from each of the 2 hospitals from which they receive the largest volume of patient referrals. Survey administration occurred between January 2019 and March 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall assessment of information completeness, timeliness, and usability using 5-point Likert scales. Detailed measures, including (1) completeness-routine sharing of 23 specific information types; (2) timeliness-how often information arrived after the patient; and (3) usability-whether information was duplicative, extraneous, or not tailored to SNF needs. In addition, 8 relational characteristics (eg, shared staffing, collaborative meetings, and referral volume) and 10 structural characteristics (eg, size, ownership, and staffing) were assessed as potential factors associated with better information sharing. Results: Of 471 hospital-SNF pairs, 64 (13.5%) reported excellent performance on all 3 dimensions of information sharing, whereas 141 (30.0%) were at or below the mean performance on all dimensions. Social status (missing in 309 pairs [65.7%]) and behavioral status (missing in 319 pairs [67.7%]) were the most common types of missing information. Receipt of hospital information was delayed, sometimes (159 pairs [33.8%]) or often (77 pairs [16.4%]) arriving after the patient. In total, 358 pairs [76.0%] reported at least 1 usability shortcoming. Having a hospital clinician on site at the SNF was associated in multivariate analysis with more complete (odds ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.07-2.78; P = .03), timely (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.08-2.88; P = .02), and usable (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.02-2.63; P = .04) information sharing. Hospital accountable care organization participation was associated with more timely information sharing (odds ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.13-3.14; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, US SNFs reported significant shortcomings in the completeness, timeliness, and usability of information provided by hospitals to support patient transitions. These shortcomings are likely associated with a suboptimal transition experience. Shared clinicians represent a potential strategy to improve information sharing but are costly. New payment models such as accountable care organizations may offer a more scalable approach but were only associated with more timely sharing.

Discharge documentation of patients discharged to subacute facilities: a three-year quality improvement process across an integrated health care system.

BACKGROUND: Effective communication among physicians during hospital discharge is critical to patient care. Partners Healthcare (Boston) has been engaged in a multi-year process to measure and improve the quality of documentation of all patients discharged from its five acute care hospitals to subacute facilities. METHODS: Partners first engaged stakeholders to develop a consensus set of 12 required data elements for all discharges to subacute facilities. A measurement process was established and later refined. Quality improvement interventions were then initiated to address measured deficiencies and included education of physicians and nurses, improvements in information technology, creation of or improvements in discharge documentation templates, training of hospitalists to serve as role models, feedback to physicians and their service chiefs regarding reviewed cases, and case manager review of documentation before discharge. To measure improvement in quality as a result of these efforts, rates of simultaneous inclusion of all 12 applicable data elements ("defect-free rate") were analyzed over time. RESULTS: Some 3,101 discharge documentation packets of patients discharged to subacute facilities from January 1, 2006, through September 2008 were retrospectively studied. During the 11 monitored quarters, the defect-free rate increased from 65% to 96% (p < .001 for trend). The largest improvements were seen in documentation of preadmission medication lists, allergies, follow-up, and warfarin information. CONCLUSIONS: Institution of rigorous measurement, feedback, and multidisciplinary, multimodal quality improvement processes improved the inclusion of data elements in discharge documentation required for safe hospital discharge across a large integrated health care system.

Deficits in discharge documentation in patients transferred to rehabilitation facilities on anticoagulation: results of a systemwide evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation is a commonly prescribed and effective therapy for several medical conditions but requires detailed communication among clinicians to avoid adverse patient outcomes following hospital discharge. METHODS: Discharge documentation packets of a sample of patients discharged from all five acute care hospitals of the Partners Healthcare System to 30 subacute facilities in Boston and prescribed anticoagulation for treatment or prophylaxis of thromboembolic disease were evaluated. Required data elements included information on anticoagulation indication, duration, dosing, monitoring, and follow-up. Discharge documentation packets were randomly selected for reviewers at acute sites, whereas reviewers at subacute sites selected which packets to review. RESULTS: Of 757 patients prescribed anticoagulation at discharge from March 2005 through June 2007, duration of therapy (for unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin [UFH/LMWH]) and recent dosing and monitoring information (for warfarin) were the areas with the biggest deficits. Of the patients prescribed UFH/LMWH or warfarin, 45.4% and 16.4%, respectively, had all the required information in the discharge summary. Patients discharged from community hospitals were more likely to be discharged with all the information needed for the use of warfarin (Odds Ratio [OR], 2.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-5.46) or UFH/LMWH (OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.98-4.44) than patients discharged from academic medical centers. DISCUSSION: Important information to safely prescribe anticoagulation after discharge was often missing from the discharge summaries of patients transferred from acute hospitals to subacute facilities. Future research should focus on developing, implementing, and evaluating quality improvement interventions to address this gap.

Integration of a patient's care within a health care network.

Integrated networks add value to patient care through several mechanisms--sharing information and practice consistency based on evidence and access to a wide range of physicians and patient care venues. Successful networks are tied together through shared information systems and electronic medical records. The Domain Management Model provides a systematic structure for thinking about patients, especially those with physical disabilities and chronic illnesses, and can help improve care organization and documentation within networks.

Use of a transitional minimum data set (TMDS) to improve communication between nursing home and emergency department providers.

OBJECTIVE: To study the adoption of a transitional minimum data set (TMDS) and its effectiveness in conveying essential clinical data elements between skilled nursing facility (SNF) and emergency department (ED) staff. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review of patients transferred from one SNF to one ED over a 14-month period before and after the implementation of the TMDS, to determine whether it improved data transfer compared with prior practice. SETTINGS: One urban 140-bed SNF, averaging 17 ED transfers per month, and their affiliated ED at a major tertiary care hospital in Boston, MA. PARTICIPANTS: The medical records of 74 residents transferred from the SNF to the ED comprised the study data. INTERVENTION: A Transition of Care Minimum Data Set necessary for ED care was developed based on a literature review and expert panel consensus. From this, a TMDS tool was derived. The nursing facility staff was trained on the use of the TMDS tool (Resident Transfer Form and transfer packet), which was sent with each patient at the time of transfer from the SNF to the ED. MEASUREMENTS: Effectiveness of data transfer was determined by the proportion of TMDS items received by the ED following implementation of the TMDS in comparison with prior care. Adoption rate of the TMDS tool was determined by the proportion of hospital medical records that contained a paper copy of the resident transfer form. RESULTS: Following the implementation of the TMDS there was statistically significant improvement in data transfer of 15 of 30 TMDS items. Among these items were the following: patient's family notified of transfer, contact information for the MD/NP at the SNF, contact information for obtaining more patient information from the SNF, resuscitation status, baseline cognitive and functional status, isolation precautions and risk alerts, and whether the SNF could accept the patient back after treatment in the ED. The Resident Transfer Form was found in the hospital medical record of 73% of patients. There were anecdotal reports of hospital provider satisfaction with the TMDS and RTF. CONCLUSION: The TMDS was associated with marked improvement in the transfer of essential clinical information. Educational efforts are warranted to increase consistency of usage.

Improving the discharge process by embedding a discharge facilitator in a resident team.

BACKGROUND: Hospital discharges are vulnerable periods for patient safety, especially in teaching hospitals where discharges are done by residents with competing demands. We sought to assess whether embedding a nurse practitioner on a medical team to help physicians with the discharge process would improve communication, patient follow-up, and hospital reutilization. METHODS: A 5-month randomized controlled trial was conducted on the medical service at an academic tertiary-care hospital. A nurse practitioner was randomly assigned to 1 resident team to complete discharge paperwork, arrange follow-up appointments and prescriptions, communicate discharge plans with nursing and primary care physicians, and answer questions from discharged patients. RESULTS: Intervention patients had more discharge summaries completed within 24 hours (67% vs. 47%, P < 0.001). Similarly, they had more follow-up appointments scheduled by the time of discharge (62% vs. 36%, P < 0.0001) and attended those appointments more often within 2 weeks (36% vs. 23%, P < 0.0002). Intervention patients knew whom to call with questions (95% vs. 85%, P = 0.003) and were more satisfied with the discharge process (97% vs. 76%, P < 0.0001). Attending rounds on the intervention team finished on time (45% vs. 31%, P = 0.058), and residents signed out on average 46 minutes earlier each day. There was no significant difference between the groups in 30-day emergency department visits or readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: Helping resident physicians with the discharge process improves many aspects of discharge communication and patient follow-up, and saves residents' time, but had no effect on hospital reutilization for a general medicine population.

Communication and information deficits in patients discharged to rehabilitation facilities: an evaluation of five acute care hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The quality of discharge documentation in patients discharged to rehabilitation centers and other subacute facilities is less well studied than that of patients discharged home. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of information transfer among patients discharged from acute hospitals to subacute facilities across an integrated healthcare delivery system. DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation of discharge documentation packets of selected patients. SETTING: Five acute care hospitals of the Partners Healthcare System. MEASUREMENTS: We measured the presence of specific data elements required to safely care for patients after discharge, including all data elements required by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (TJC). RESULTS: A total of 1501 discharge documentation packets were reviewed from March 2005 through June 2007. Only 1055 (70.3%) discharge summaries had all the information required by TJC, with physical examination at admission and condition at discharge most often missing (in 11.4% and 14.2% of cases, respectively). Other deficiencies not mandated by TJC included a list of preadmission medications (missing in 20.3%) and reasons for changes in these medications at discharge (35.3%), mention of pending test results (47.2%), and postdischarge management and follow-up plans (11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: We found room for improvement in the inclusion of data elements required for the safe transfer of patients from acute hospitals to subacute facilities, especially in areas such as medication reconciliation, pending test results, and adequate follow-up plans.