Hospital-Level Care at Home for Acutely Ill Adults: a Qualitative Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Substitutive hospital-level care in a patient's home ("home hospital") has been shown to lower cost, utilization, and readmission compared to traditional hospital care. However, patients' perspectives to help explain how and why interventions like home hospital accomplish many of these results are lacking. OBJECTIVE: Elucidate and explain patient perceptions of home hospital versus traditional hospital care to better describe the different perceptions of care in both settings. DESIGN: Qualitative evaluation of a randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: 36 hospitalized patients (19 home; 17 control). INTERVENTION: Traditional hospital ("control") versus home hospital ("home"), including nurse and physician home visits, intravenous medications, remote monitoring, video communication, and point-of-care testing. APPROACH: We conducted a thematic content analysis of semi-structured interviews. Team members developed a coding structure through a multiphase approach, utilizing a constant comparative method. KEY RESULTS: Themes clustered around 3 domains: clinician factors, factors promoting healing, and systems factors. Clinician factors were similar in both groups; both described beneficial interactions with clinical staff; however, home patients identified greater continuity of care. For factors promoting healing, home patients described a locus of control surrounding their sleep, activity, and environmental comfort that control patients lacked. For systems factors, home patients experienced more efficient processes and logistics, particularly around admission and technology use, while both noted difficulty with discharge planning. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to control patients, home patients had better experiences with their care team, had more experiences promoting healing such as better sleep and physical activity, and had better experiences with systems factors such as the admission processes. Potential explanations include continuity of care, the power and familiarity of the home, and streamlined logistics. Future improvements include enhanced care transitions and ensuring digital interfaces are usable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03203759.

Hospital-Level Care at Home for Acutely Ill Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Substitutive hospital-level care in a patient's home may reduce cost, health care use, and readmissions while improving patient experience, although evidence from randomized controlled trials in the United States is lacking. Objective: To compare outcomes of home hospital versus usual hospital care for patients requiring admission. Design: Randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03203759). Setting: Academic medical center and community hospital. Patients: 91 adults (43 home and 48 control) admitted via the emergency department with selected acute conditions. Intervention: Acute care at home, including nurse and physician home visits, intravenous medications, remote monitoring, video communication, and point-of-care testing. Measurements: The primary outcome was the total direct cost of the acute care episode (sum of costs for nonphysician labor, supplies, medications, and diagnostic tests). Secondary outcomes included health care use and physical activity during the acute care episode and at 30 days. Results: The adjusted mean cost of the acute care episode was 38% (95% CI, 24% to 49%) lower for home patients than control patients. Compared with usual care patients, home patients had fewer laboratory orders (median per admission, 3 vs. 15), imaging studies (median, 14% vs. 44%), and consultations (median, 2% vs. 31%). Home patients spent a smaller proportion of the day sedentary (median, 12% vs. 23%) or lying down (median, 18% vs. 55%) and were readmitted less frequently within 30 days (7% vs. 23%). Limitation: The study involved 2 sites, a small number of home physicians, and a small sample of highly selected patients (with a 63% refusal rate among potentially eligible patients); these factors may limit generalizability. Conclusion: Substitutive home hospitalization reduced cost, health care use, and readmissions while increasing physical activity compared with usual hospital care. Primary Funding Source: Partners HealthCare Center for Population Health and internal departmental funds.

Autonomous AI systems in the face of liability, regulations and costs.

Autonomous AI systems in medicine promise improved outcomes but raise concerns about liability, regulation, and costs. With the advent of large-language models, which can understand and generate medical text, the urgency for addressing these concerns increases as they create opportunities for more sophisticated autonomous AI systems. This perspective explores the liability implications for physicians, hospitals, and creators of AI technology, as well as the evolving regulatory landscape and payment models. Physicians may be favored in malpractice cases if they follow rigorously validated AI recommendations. However, AI developers may face liability for failing to adhere to industry-standard best practices during development and implementation. The evolving regulatory landscape, led by the FDA, seeks to ensure transparency, evaluation, and real-world monitoring of AI systems, while payment models such as MPFS, NTAP, and commercial payers adapt to accommodate them. The widespread adoption of autonomous AI systems can potentially streamline workflows and allow doctors to concentrate on the human aspects of healthcare.

Trends in High-Severity Billing of Hospitalized Medicare Beneficiaries Treated by Hospitalists vs Nonhospitalists.

Importance: As US hospital expenditures continue to rise, understanding drivers of high-severity billing for hospitalized patients among inpatient physicians is critically important. Objective: To evaluate high-severity billing trends of Medicare beneficiaries treated by hospitalists vs nonhospitalists. Design Setting and Participants: This cohort study used Medicare fee-for-service claims of hospitalized patients from 2009 through 2018 to compare the proportion of high-severity billing between general medicine physicians classified as hospitalists vs nonhospitalists across initial, subsequent, and discharge hospital encounters. We compared physicians within the same hospital using hospital fixed effects and adjusted for patient demographics and comorbidities. Changes in the billing practices were assessed by investigating differences in slopes using an interaction term between physician type and time. Analyses were conducted between August 2021 and January 2022. Exposures: Treatment by hospitalists vs nonhospitalists. Main Outcomes and Measures: High-severity billing for initial, subsequent, and discharge hospital encounters. Results: The sample included 3 121 260 and 1 855 678 Medicare beneficiaries treated by hospitalists vs nonhospitalists, respectively. In each year, mean age, proportion female, proportion Black and Hispanic dual status, and mean number of chronic conditions were similar among those treated by hospitalists vs nonhospitalists (standardized mean difference < .01). The number of hospitalists grew by 76%, from 23 390 in 2009 to 41 084 in 2018, whereas nonhospitalists decreased by 43.6% (53 758 to 30 289). The proportion of encounters performed by hospitalists increased for the initial hospital encounters (46.3% to 76%), subsequent encounters (46.8% to 76.7%), and discharge encounters (46.1% to 78.5%) over the 10-year period. The proportion of high-severity billing across the hospital, subsequent, and discharge encounters was consistently higher among hospitalists relative to nonhospitalists across all years. Compared with the trends for nonhospitalists, the proportion of high-severity billing grew by 0.46% per year (95% CI, 0.44% to 0.49%; P < .001) for initial encounters, 0.38% per year (95% CI, 0.37% to 0.39%; P < .001) for subsequent encounters, and by 1.1% per year (95% CI, 1.1% to 1.15%; P < .001) for discharge encounters among hospitalists. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries treated in hospitals, high-severity billing increased over time for hospital encounters at higher rates for hospitalists than for nonhospitalists. These differences do not appear to be explained by patient complexity. The increase in the number of hospitalists over time may be contributing to rising national costs related to hospital care.

Usefulness of radiofrequency ablation of supraventricular tachycardia to decrease inappropriate shocks from implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies can lead to significant adverse events and increased mortality. These therapies are often the result of supraventricular tachycardias (SVTs). The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of SVT leading to inappropriate shocks in a large cohort of patients with ICDs and assess the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in decreasing these therapies. Patients with ICDs and recurrent SVTs were identified. A cohort of patients with ICD therapies subsequently underwent electrophysiologic study and RFA. Eighty-four patients (13%) were found to have SVT leading to 122 inappropriate ICD shocks and 130 episodes of antitachycardia pacing therapies. Median time to SVT onset after ICD implantation was 269 days. Electrophysiologic studies were performed in 30 patients. Successful RFA was performed for atrial tachycardia, atrial flutter, or atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia in 22 patients. Ninety-five percent of patients who underwent successful SVT ablation had no further inappropriate ICD therapies compared to 63% of patients in whom ablation was not performed during a mean follow-up of 20.7 ± 11.9 months. In conclusion, SVT is responsible for a significant number of inappropriate ICD therapies. RFA is an effective strategy to substantially decrease subsequent inappropriate ICD therapies.

Lesiones urológicas en cirugía gineco-obstétrica / Urologic lesions in gineco-obstetrical surgery

Se revisaron las lesiones urinarias en las operaciones ginecológicas y obstétricas en los Hospitales Vargas de Caracas (1983-1989) y Maternidad Santa Ana del Instituto Venezolano de los Seguros Sociales (1984-1988), para ver la frecuencia y evolución de las pacientes con estas lesiones. En el Hospital Vargas de 433 operaciones pelvianas practicadas por cirugía y ginecología se halló una incidencia de 0,92 por ciento. En la Maternidad Santa Ana de 13475 pacientes operadas, 12269 (16,1 por ciento) fueron sometidas a cirugía obstétrica y 1206 (1,58 por ciento) a cirugía ginecológica, la frecuencia de lesiones urinarias fue 0,073 por ciento. Se analizaron los factores de riesgos, como operaciones anteriores que hace más frecuentes estas lesiones. La cirugía obstétrica mayormente está determinada por cesáreas y la ginecológica por histerectomías totales por miomatosis uterina. Todas las lesiones fueron de vejiga y resultados con sutura en dos planos, con drenaje por una semana en el postoperatorio