The impact of a multidisciplinary goals-of-care program on unplanned readmission rates at a comprehensive cancer center.

PURPOSE: This study examined the 30-day unplanned readmission rate in the medical oncology population before and after the implementation of an institution-wide multicomponent interdisciplinary goals of care (myGOC) program. METHODS: This retrospective study compared the 30-day unplanned readmission rates in consecutive medical patients during the pre-implementation period (May 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019) and the post-implementation period (May 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020). Secondary outcomes included 7-day unplanned readmission rates, inpatient do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, and palliative care consults. We randomly selected a hospitalization encounter for each unique patient during each study period for statistical analysis. A multivariate analysis model was used to examine the association between 30-day unplanned readmission rates and implementation of the myGOC program. RESULTS: There were 7028 and 5982 unique medical patients during the pre- and post-implementation period, respectively. The overall 30-day unplanned readmission rate decreased from 24.0 to 21.3% after implementation of the myGOC program. After adjusting for covariates, the myGOC program implementation remained significantly associated with a reduction in 30-day unplanned readmission rates (OR [95% CI] 0.85 [0.77, 0.95], p = 0.003). Other factors significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of a 30-day unplanned readmission were an inpatient DNR order, advanced care planning documentation, and an emergent admission type. We also observed a significant decrease in 7-day unplanned readmission rates (OR [95% CI] 0.75 [0.64, 0.89]) after implementation of the myGOC program. CONCLUSION: The 30-day and 7-day unplanned readmission rates decreased in our hospital after implementation of a system-wide multicomponent GOC intervention.

Cost of Hospitalization Associated with Inpatient Goals-of-Care Program Implementation at a Comprehensive Cancer Center: A Propensity Score Analysis.

The impact of goals-of-care programs on acute hospitalization costs is unclear. We compared the hospitalization cost in an 8-month period before implementation of a multimodal interdisciplinary goals-of-care program (1 May 2019 to 31 December 2019) to an 8-month period after program implementation (1 May 2020 to 31 December 2020). Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for differences in potential covariates. The primary outcome was total direct cost during the hospital stay for each index hospitalization. This analysis included 6977 patients in 2019 and 5964 patients in 2020. The total direct cost decreased by 3% in 2020 but was not statistically significant (ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.92, 1.03). Under individual categories, there was a significant decrease in medical oncology (ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.50, 0.68) and pharmacy costs (ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.79, 0.96), and an increase in room and board (ratio 1.06, 95% CI 1.01, 1.10). In subgroup analysis, ICU patients had a significant reduction in total direct cost after program implementation (ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.72, 0.94). After accounting for the length of ICU admission, we found that the total direct cost per hospital day was no longer different between 2019 and 2020 (ratio 0.986, 95% CI 0.92, 1.05), suggesting that shorter ICU admissions likely explained much of the observed cost savings. This study provides real-world data on how "in-the-moment" GOC conversations may contribute to reduced hospitalization costs among ICU patients.

Enhancing Implementation of the I-PASS Handoff Tool Using a Provider Handoff Task Force at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Communication failures are among the most common causes of harmful medical errors. At one Comprehensive Cancer Center, patient handoffs varied among services. The authors describe the implementation and results of an organization-wide project to improve handoffs and implement an evidence-based handoff tool across all inpatient services. METHODS: The research team created a task force composed of members from 22 hospital services-advanced practice providers (APPs), trainees, some faculty members, electronic health record (EHR) staff, education and training specialists, and nocturnal providers. Over two years, the task force expanded to include consulting services and Anesthesiology. Factors contributing to ineffective handoffs were identified and organized into categories. The EHR I-PASS tool was used to standardize handoff documentation. Training was provided to staff on its use, and compliance was monitored using a customized dashboard. I-PASS champions in each service were responsible for the rollout of I-PASS in their respective services. The data were reported quarterly to the Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) governing committee. Provider handoff perception was assessed through the biennial Institution-wide safety culture survey. RESULTS: All fellows, residents, APPs, and physician assistants were trained in the use of I-PASS, either online or in person. Adherence to the I-PASS written tool improved from 41.6% in 2019 to 70.5% in 2022 (p < 0.05), with improvements seen in most services. The frequency of updating I-PASS elements and the action list in the handoff tool also increased over time. The handoff favorability score on the safety culture survey improved from 38% in 2018 to 59% in 2022. CONCLUSION: The implementation approach developed by the Provider Handoff Task Force led to increased use of the I-PASS EHR tool and improved safety culture survey handoff favorability.

Improving Goal-Concordant Care in Intensive Care Unit Admissions from the Emergency Department in a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

CONTEXT: As patients approach the end of life, discussion of their treatment goals is essential to avoid unnecessary suffering and deliver care in a manner consistent with their overall values. OBJECTIVES: Implement a multipronged approach to improve the rates of advance care planning (ACP) documentation among providers admitting patients with cancer to the intensive care unit (ICU) from the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We developed multiple interventions including the development of a best-practice advisory to alert providers when patients had previous do-not-resuscitate orders; standardization of ACP documentation; early oncologist involvement in goals-of-care conversations with patients; a survey of ED providers to identify barriers to success; and positive reinforcement strategies aimed at improving the rates of ACP documentation in patients admitted from the ED to the ICU. RESULTS: Prior to our interventions, only 13% of patients admitted to the ICU from the ED had ACP notes. This percentage increased to 90% by the last month of our project. CONCLUSION: Through our multipronged approach, we significantly improved the rates of ACP documentation among providers admitting patients from the ED to the ICU.