Optimization of Patient Progression in a New Era: A Comprehensive Framework.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: The onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic increased the demand for inpatient services and led to widespread staffing shortages in the acute and post-acute setting, contributing to delayed inpatient throughput and leading to capacity crises. Novel strategies are needed to facilitate the efficient progression of hospitalized patients when medically ready for lower levels of care. The authors have developed a foundational strategic framework for patient progression to ensure capture of patient progression data, enhance efficiency, and optimal utilization of post-acute resources in increasingly complex and resource-constrained acute and post-acute environments. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTINGS: Interventions were implemented, and metrics of success tracked as part of an overarching framework to test new models of care or optimize existing assets related to barriers to patient progression. Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) and Brigham and Women's Faulkner Hospital (BWFH) comprise an academic medical center and a community hospital, respectively, that are affiliated with Massachusetts General Brigham (MGB), a nonprofit health care system in Massachusetts. Key interventions include (1) screening to prioritize patients needing case management services through a modified early screening for discharge planning tool and process; (2) communicating, documenting, identifying patient progression status, barriers to discharge and post-acute needs through interdisciplinary care optimization rounds, a novel tool in the electronic health record, and an associated dashboard; (3) managing active high-risk patients through a novel complex care team and post-acute strategy development; (4) developing novel transportation and hospice pathways; and (5) establishing community hospital repatriation and a physical therapy "Why Not Home" campaign. FINDINGS: Key metrics of success were (1) modified discharge planning tool resulting in screening out low-risk patients (53%) and impacting length of stay (0.55-day reduction, p = .083) during a 3-month intervention versus control study; (2) documentation adherence in more than 98% of patients 10 months postimplementation; (3) complex care team achieving a 2.5% reduction in Case Mix Index-adjusted length of stay 6 months postimplementation; (4) use of care van offsetting ambulance/chair car in 10% of cases, and earlier discharge time/length of stay in 21% of cases 3 months postimplementation; and (5) implementation of community repatriation impacting delay days to discharge (10-month pilot, 40 patients accounting for 1,000 delay days). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a novel comprehensive framework focusing on optimizing patient progression resulted in increased operational efficiency and positively impacted length of stay at our academic and community hospitals. Additional study is actively ongoing to understand long-term benefit of the innovations that the authors have developed. Further interventions are needed to wholly mitigate evolving capacity challenges in the acute and post-acute settings. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE: The authors' implementation of the Brigham framework for progression demonstrates that innovative approaches to case management can help address the evolving challenges in care transitions planning. Notable opportunities include approaches that empower case managers as multidisciplinary team leaders, improve workflow, utilize patient progression data, prioritize patients with complex care needs support key patient populations, and promote post-acute collaboration.

A Hospice Transitions Program for Patients in the Emergency Department.

Importance: Patients often visit the emergency department (ED) near the end of life. Their common disposition is inpatient hospital admission, which can result in a delayed transition to hospice care and, ultimately, an inpatient hospital death that may be misaligned with their goals of care. Objective: To assess the association of hospice use with a novel multidisciplinary hospice program to rapidly identify and enroll eligible patients presenting to the ED near end of life. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pre-post quality improvement study of a novel, multifaceted care transitions program involving a formalized pathway with email alerts, clinician training, hospice vendor expansion, metric creation, and data tracking was conducted at a large, urban tertiary care academic medical center affiliated with a comprehensive cancer center among adult patients presenting to the ED near the end of life. The control period before program launch was from September 1, 2018, to January 31, 2020, and the intervention period after program launch was from August 1, 2021, to December 31, 2022. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was a transition to hospice without hospital admission and/or hospice admission within 96 hours of the ED visit. Secondary outcomes included length of stay and in-hospital mortality. Results: This study included 270 patients (median age, 74.0 years [IQR, 62.0-85.0 years]; 133 of 270 women [49.3%]) in the control period, and 388 patients (median age, 73.0 years [IQR, 60.0-84.0 years]; 208 of 388 women [53.6%]) in the intervention period, identified as eligible for hospice transition within 96 hours of ED arrival. In the control period, 61 patients (22.6%) achieved the primary outcome compared with 210 patients (54.1%) in the intervention period (P < .001). The intervention was associated with the primary outcome after adjustment for age, race and ethnicity, primary payer, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and presence of a Medical Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) (adjusted odds ratio, 5.02; 95% CI, 3.17-7.94). In addition, the presence of a MOLST was independently associated with hospice transition across all groups (adjusted odds ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.18-2.99). There was no significant difference between the control and intervention periods in inpatient length of stay (median, 2.0 days [IQR, 1.1-3.0 days] vs 1.9 days [IQR, 1.1-3.0 days]; P = .84), but in-hospital mortality was lower in the intervention period (48.5% [188 of 388] vs 64.4% [174 of 270]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, a multidisciplinary program to facilitate ED patient transitions was associated with hospice use. Further investigation is needed to examine the generalizability and sustainability of the program.