Validation of a measure of hospital maternal level of care for the United States.

BACKGROUND: Lack of a validated assessment of maternal risk-appropriate care for use in population data has prevented the existing literature from quantifying the benefit of maternal risk-appropriate care. The objective of this study was to develop a measure of hospital maternal levels of care based on the resources available at the hospital, using existing data available to researchers. METHODS: This was a secondary data analysis. The sample was abstracted from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database for 2018. Eligibility was limited to short-term acute general hospitals that reported providing maternity services as measured by hospital reporting of an obstetric service level, obstetric services, or birthing rooms. We aligned variables in the database with the ACOG criteria for each maternal level of care, then built models that used the variables to measure the maternal level of care. In each iteration, the distribution of hospitals was compared to the distribution in the CDC Levels of Care Assessment Tool Validation Pilot, assessing agreement with the Wilson Score for proportions for each level of care. Results were compared to hospital self-report in the database and measurement reported with another published method. RESULTS: The sample included 2,351 hospitals. AHA variables were available to measure resources that align with ACOG Levels 1, 2, and 3. Overall, 1219 (51.9%) of hospitals reported resources aligned with Maternal Level One, 816 (34.7%) aligned with maternal level two, and 202 (8.6%) aligned with maternal level Three. This method overestimates the prevalence of hospitals with maternal level one compared to the CDC measurement of 36.1% (Mean 52.9%; 95% CI47.2%-58.7%), and likely includes hospitals that would not qualify as level one if all resources required by the ACOG guidelines could be assessed. This method underestimates the prevalence of hospitals with maternal critical care services (Level 3 or 4) compared to CDC measure of 12.1% (Mean 8.1%; 95%CI 6.2% - 10.0%) but is an improvement over hospital self-report (24.7%) and a prior published method (32.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This method of measuring maternal level of care allows researchers to investigate the value of perinatal regionalization, risk-appropriate care, and hospital differences among the three levels of care. This study identified potential changes to the American Hospital Association Annual Survey that would improve identification of maternal levels of care for research.

Socioeconomic factors associated with use of telehealth services in outpatient care settings during the COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: To examine potential changes and socioeconomic disparities in utilization of telemedicine in non-urgent outpatient care in Nevada since the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis of telemedicine used the first nine months of 2019 and 2020 electronic health record data from regular non-urgent outpatient care in a large healthcare provider in Nevada. The dependent variables were the use of telemedicine among all outpatient visits and using telemedicine more than once among those patients who did use telemedicine. The independent variables were race/ethnicity, insurance status, and language preference. RESULTS: Telemedicine services increased from virtually zero (16 visits out of 237,997 visits) in 2019 to 10.8% (24,159 visits out of 222,750 visits) in 2020. Asians (odds ratio [OR] = 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.85,0.94) and Latinos/Hispanics (OR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.85, 0.94) were less likely to use telehealth; Spanish-speaking patients (OR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.63, 0.73) and other non-English-speaking patients (OR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.88, 0.97) were less likely to use telehealth; and both Medicare (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.89, 0.99) and Medicaid patients (OR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.87, 0.97) were less likely to use telehealth than their privately insured counterparts. Patients treated in pediatric (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.60, 0.96) and specialty care (OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.65, 0.70) were less likely to use telemedicine as compared with patients who were treated in adult medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Racial/ethnic and linguistic factors were significantly associated with the utilization of telemedicine in non-urgent outpatient care during COVID-19, with a dramatic increase in telemedicine utilization during the onset of the pandemic. Reducing barriers related to socioeconomic factors can be improved via policy and program interventions.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Financial Impact of 30-Day Readmissions for Selected Medical Conditions: A Focus on Hospital Quality Performance.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) established the Hospital Quality Initiative in 2010 to enhance patient safety, reduce hospital readmissions, improve quality, and minimize healthcare costs. In response, this study aims to systematically review the literature and conduct a meta-analysis to estimate the average cost of procedure-specific 30-day risk-standardized unplanned readmissions for Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI), Heart Failure (HF), Pneumonia, Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG), and Total Hip Arthroplasty and/or Total Knee Arthroplasty (THA/TKA). METHODS: Eligibility Criteria: This study included English language original research papers from the USA, encompassing various study designs. Exclusion criteria comprise studies lacking empirical evidence on hospital financial performance. INFORMATION SOURCES: A comprehensive search using relevant keywords was conducted across databases from January 1990 to December 2019 (updated in March 2021), covering peer-reviewed articles and gray literature. Risk of Bias: Bias in the included studies was assessed considering study design, adjustment for confounding factors, and potential effect modifiers. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: The review adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Employing Monte Carlo simulations, a meta-analysis was conducted with 100,000 simulated samples. Results indicated mean 30-day readmission costs: USD 16,037.08 (95% CI, USD 15,196.01-16,870.06) overall, USD 6852.97 (95% CI, USD 6684.44-7021.08) for AMI, USD 9817.42 (95% CI, USD 9575.82-10,060.43) for HF, and USD 21,346.50 (95% CI, USD 20,818.14-21,871.85) for THA/TKA. DISCUSSION: Despite the financial challenges that hospitals face due to the ACA and the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, this meta-analysis contributes valuable insights into the consistent cost trends associated with 30-day readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide comprehensive insights into the financial implications of 30-day readmissions for specific medical conditions, enhancing our understanding of the nexus between healthcare quality and financial performance.

Increasing Emotional Distress and Use of Health Services among Hospitality Industry Workers During and After the COVID-19 Lockdown.

Objective: To examine the emotional distress situation among hospitality industry workers and their access to and use of health care including telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A survey was administered on the Qualtrics platform both in English and Spanish from November 18, 2020, to November 30, 2020, through the Culinary Workers Union in Nevada. A total of 1182 union members participated in the survey, of whom 892 completed the survey. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were conducted. Results: Among 892 respondents, 78% were people of color; 71% were laid off or furloughed during the COVID-related shutdown, but most had access to health care. Further, 78.8% experienced at least 2 or more signs of emotional distress during the pandemic. Females and unemployment status were positively associated with experiencing emotional distress. About 43.5% received care through telehealth, although most did not prefer telehealth (74.2%). Only 18.3% of non-telehealth users were interested in telehealth and 15.0% had never heard about telehealth. Conclusions: Health insurance coverage is essential for access to health services regardless of employment status. Strengthening mental health services, including psychological counselling for hospitality workers, is needed in such public health emergency situations as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Telehealth Utilization and Good Care among Informal Caregivers: Health Information National Trends Survey, 2022.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telehealth services. Informal caregivers provide vital support to family and friends. Studying telehealth among informal caregivers is crucial to understanding how technology can support and enhance their caregiving responsibilities, potentially enhancing telehealth services for them as well as their patients. The present study aims to nationally investigate telehealth utilization and quality among informal caregivers. METHODS: This cross-sectional investigation employed the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) dataset. Informal caregivers, telehealth variables (utilization, good care, technical problems, convenience, and concerns about infection exposure), and sociodemographic factors (age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, education, health insurance, and census regions) were identified based on questions in the survey. Weighted multivariable logistic regression models were employed to calculate odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and p-values. RESULTS: Significant disparities in telehealth utilization were detected among informal caregivers (N = 831), when telehealth users were compared to non-users. Those aged 50-64 (OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.20-0.65) and 65+ (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.21-0.74) had significantly lower odds of using telehealth than those aged 35-49. Men had significantly lower odds of telehealth utilization (OR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.25-0.87). Black caregivers compared to Whites had significantly lower odds (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.24-0.99), while health insurance increased odds (OR = 5.31, 95% CI = 1.67-16.86) of telehealth utilization. Informal caregivers who used telehealth were more likely to be perceived as good telehealth caregivers if they had no telehealth technical issues compared to caregivers who had (OR = 4.61, CI = 1.61-13.16; p-value = 0.0051) and if they were from the South compared to the West (OR = 2.95, CI = 1.18-7.37, p-value = 0.0213). CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, to the best of our knowledge, we have nationally investigated telehealth utilization and quality among informal caregivers. Disparities in telehealth utilization among informal caregivers are evident, with age, gender, race, and health insurance being significant determinants. Telehealth quality is significantly influenced by technical problems and census regions, emphasizing the importance of addressing these aspects in telehealth service development for informal caregivers.