Implementation of a virtual and in-person hybrid hospital-at-home model in two geographically separate regions utilizing a single command center: a descriptive cohort study.

BACKGROUND: As providers look to scale high-acuity care in the patient home setting, hospital-at-home is becoming more prevalent. The traditional model of hospital-at-home usually relies on care delivery by in-home providers, caring for patients in urban communities through academic medical centers. Our objective is to describe the process and outcomes of Mayo Clinic's Advanced Care at Home (ACH) program, a hybrid virtual and in-person hospital-at-home model combining a single, virtual provider-staffed command center with a vendor-mediated in-person medical supply chain to simultaneously deliver care to patients living near an urban hospital-at-home command center and patients living in a rural region in a different US state and time zone. METHODS: A descriptive, retrospective medical records review of all patients admitted to ACH between July 6, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were admitted to ACH from an urban academic medical center in Florida and a rural community hospital in Wisconsin. We collected patient volumes, age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance type, primary hospital diagnosis, 30-day mortality rate, in-program mortality, 30-day readmission rate, rate of return to hospital during acute phase, All Patient Refined-Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRG) Severity of Illness (SOI), and length of stay (LOS) in both the inpatient-equivalent acute phase and post-acute equivalent restorative phase. RESULTS: Six hundred and eighty-six patients were admitted to the ACH program, 408 in Florida and 278 in Wisconsin. The most common diagnosis seen were infectious pneumonia (27.0%), septicemia / bacteremia (11.5%), congestive heart failure exacerbation (11.5%), and skin and soft tissue infections (6.3%). Median LOS in the acute phase was 3 days (IQR 2-5) and median stay in the restorative phase was 22 days (IQR 11-26). In-program mortality rate was 0% and 30-day mortality was 0.6%. The mean APR-DRG SOI was 2.9 (SD 0.79) and the 30-day readmission rate was 9.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The ACH hospital-at-home model was able to provide both high-acuity inpatient-level care and post-acute care to patients in their homes through a single command center to patients in urban and rural settings in two different geographical locations with favorable outcomes of low mortality and hospital readmissions.

Improving Access for Priority Patient Populations Within Outpatient Specialty Practices.

In an outpatient health care practice, it can be challenging to convert patient demand into completed appointments, even for high-priority patients. One of the barriers to higher conversion rates is excessive appointment lag time, which can lead to nonattendance or cancellation for other reasons. In this article, we develop a mechanism for reducing appointment lag time for priority patient populations. We report on a pilot program with 12 practices, split into pilot and control groups, and involving 11001 patients requesting new appointments. The results of the pilot show that statistically significant improvements to conversion rates can be achieved.

Effect of hospital-at-home vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill adults: study protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delivering acute hospital care to patients at home might reduce costs and improve patient experience. Mayo Clinic's Advanced Care at Home (ACH) program is a novel virtual hybrid model of "Hospital at Home." This pragmatic randomized controlled non-inferiority trial aims to compare two acute care delivery models: ACH vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill patients. METHODS: We aim to enroll 360 acutely ill adult patients (≥18 years) who are admitted to three hospitals in Arizona, Florida, and Wisconsin, two of which are academic medical centers and one is a community-based practice. The eligibility criteria will follow what is used in routine practice determined by local clinical teams, including clinical stability, social stability, health insurance plans, and zip codes. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to ACH or traditional inpatient care, stratified by site. The primary outcome is a composite outcome of all-cause mortality and 30-day readmission. Secondary outcomes include individual outcomes in the composite endpoint, fall with injury, medication errors, emergency room visit, transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), cost, the number of days alive out of hospital, and patient-reported quality of life. A mixed-methods study will be conducted with patients, clinicians, and other staff to investigate their experience. DISCUSSION: The pragmatic trial will examine a novel virtual hybrid model for delivering high-acuity medical care at home. The findings will inform patient selection and future large-scale implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05212077. Registered on 27 January 2022.

Addressing the Challenge of COVID-19: One Health Care Site's Leadership Response to the Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created an extremely disruptive challenge for health care leaders that required a rapid, dynamic, and innovative response. The purpose of this manuscript is to share the leadership actions and decisions at Mayo Clinic in Florida during the first 6 months of the pandemic (February to July 2020). We note 4 strategies that contributed to an effective response: (1) leverage experience with disaster preparedness and mobilize regional and national networks; (2) use surge models to anticipate and to address supply chain issues as well as practical and financial effects of the pandemic; (3) adapt creatively to establish new safety and procedural protocols in various areas for various populations; and (4) communicate timely information effectively and be the common source of truth. Mayo Clinic in Florida was able to address the surges of patients with COVID-19, to provide ongoing tertiary care, and to restore function within the first 6 months with new, strengthened practices and protocols.

Disparities in participation in cancer clinical trials in the United States : a symptom of a healthcare system in crisis.

Disparities in minorities' representation in cancer clinical trials have been shown only in adult populations, which suggest that the main causes of these disparities relate to health system-based barriers, including issues of poverty (lack of insurance), poor access to trials, and an inadequate number of clinical trials. Initiatives that increase the participation of community physicians in cancer clinical research trials and increase low socioeconomic status patients' access to cancer trials will likely ameliorate this problem.