Clinical yield of computed tomography brain scans in older general medical patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical yield of computed tomography (CT) brain scans in a prospective cohort of older patients admitted to the general medicine service. DESIGN: Nested cohort study of 117 subjects enrolled in previous prospective cohort study of 919 subjects. SETTING: University-affiliated teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized general medical patients aged 70 and older who received one or more brain CT scans during their hospital stay. MEASUREMENTS: Review of medical records and interpretation of the first brain CT scan in these 117 patients for indications for ordering scans and clinically significant brain abnormalities. Medical records of patients with brain CT scans with abnormalities were reviewed for 2 weeks after the scan for changes in medical management resulting from scan findings. Three independent reviewers adjudicated the presence of abnormalities and resulting treatment changes. RESULTS: Of the 117 brain CT scans, 32 (27%) were ordered to exclude intracranial hemorrhage, 30 (26%) to exclude cerebrovascular accident (CVA), 16 (14%) for falls, 15 (13%) for syncope, seven (6%) to exclude subdural hemorrhage, five (4%) for mental status change, and 12 (10%) for other reasons. Of the 117 brain CT scans, 29 (25%) had abnormalities, including acute CVA or hemorrhage, old CVA, meningioma, and other abnormalities. Only 10 (9% of all scans, 34% of abnormal scans) resulted in treatment changes (including consultations, further imaging, stroke evaluation, and drug changes). The presence of focal neurological deficits was significantly associated with treatment changes after CT scans (odds ratio=13.2, 95% confidence interval=1.7-161.5). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the overall clinical yield of brain CT scans in unselected older hospitalized patients is low. Targeting scans toward patients with new focal neurological deficits will help to improve clinical yield.

Will older persons and their clinicians use a shared decision-making instrument?

OBJECTIVE: To examine experiences of older persons and their clinicians with shared decision making (SDM) and their willingness to use an SDM instrument. DESIGN: Qualitative focus group study. PARTICIPANTS: Four focus groups of 41 older persons and 2 focus groups of 11 clinicians, purposively sampled to encompass a range of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. APPROACH AND MAIN RESULTS: Audiotaped responses were transcribed, coded independently, and analyzed by 3 reviewers using the constant comparative method. Patient participants described using informal facilitators of shared decision making and supported use of an SDM instrument to keep "the doctor and patient on the same page." They envisioned the instrument as "part of the medical record" that could be "referenced at home." Clinician participants described the instrument as a "motivational and educational tool" that could "customize care for individual patients." Some clinician and patient participants expressed reluctance given time constraints and unfamiliarity with the process of setting participatory clinical goals. CONCLUSIONS: Participants indicated that they would use a shared decision-making instrument in their clinical encounters and attributed multiple functions to the instrument, especially as a tool to facilitate agreement with treatment goals and plans.

Consequences of preventing delirium in hospitalized older adults on nursing home costs.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether costs of long-term nursing home (NH) care for patients who received a multicomponent targeted intervention (MTI) to prevent delirium while hospitalized were less than for those who did not receive the intervention. DESIGN: Longitudinal follow-up from a randomized trial. SETTING: Posthospital discharge settings: community-based care and NHs. PARTICIPANTS: Eight hundred one hospitalized patients aged 70 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Patients were followed for 1 year after discharge, and measures of NH service use and costs were constructed. Total long-term NH costs were estimated using a two-part regression model and compared across intervention and control groups. RESULTS: Of the 400 patients in the intervention group and 401 patients in the matched control group, 153 (38%) and 148 (37%), respectively, were admitted to a NH during the year, and 54 (13%) and 51 (13%), respectively, were long-term NH patients. The MTI had no effect on the likelihood of receiving long-term NH care, but of patients receiving long-term NH care, those in the MTI group had significantly lower total costs, shorter length of stay and lower cost per survival day. Adjusted total costs were $50,881 per long-term NH patient in the MTI group and $60,327 in the control group, a savings of 15.7% (P=.01). CONCLUSION: Active methods to prevent delirium are associated with a 15.7% decrease in long-term NH costs. Shorter length of stay of patients receiving long-term NH services was the primary source of these savings.

A chart-based method for identification of delirium: validation compared with interviewer ratings using the confusion assessment method.

OBJECTIVES: To validate a chart-based method for identification of delirium and compare it with direct interviewer assessment using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). DESIGN: Prospective validation study. SETTING: Teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Nine hundred nineteen older hospitalized patients. MEASUREMENTS: A chart-based instrument for identification of delirium was created and compared with the reference standard interviewer ratings, which used direct cognitive assessment to complete the CAM for delirium. Trained nurse chart abstractors were blinded to all interview data, including cognitive and CAM ratings. Factors influencing the correct identification of delirium in the chart were examined. RESULTS: Delirium was present in 115 (12.5%) patients according to the CAM. Sensitivity of the chart-based instrument was 74%, specificity was 83%, and likelihood ratio for a positive result was 4.4. Overall agreement between chart and interviewer ratings was 82%, kappa=0.41. By contrast, using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, administrative codes, the sensitivity for delirium was 3%, and specificity was 99%. Independent factors associated with incorrect chart identification of delirium were dementia, severe illness, and high baseline delirium risk. With all three factors present, the chart instrument was three times more likely to identify patients incorrectly than with none of the factors present. CONCLUSION: A chart-based instrument for delirium, which should be useful for patient safety and quality-improvement programs in older persons, was validated. Because of potential misclassification, the chart-based instrument is not recommended for individual patient care or diagnostic purposes.

Physicians' interactions with third-party payers: is deception necessary?

Published reports indicate that physicians sometimes use deceptive tactics with third-party payers. Many physicians appear to be willing to deceive to secure care that they perceive as necessary, particularly when illnesses are severe and appeals procedures for care denials are burdensome. Physicians whose practices include larger numbers of Medicaid or managed care patients seem more willing to deceive third-party payers than are other physicians. The use of deception has important implications for physician professionalism, patient trust, and rational health policy development. If deception is as widespread as these studies suggest, there may be serious problems in the medical profession and the health care financing systems at the interface between physicians and third-party payers. Deception may be a symptom of a flawed system, in which physicians are asked to implement financing policies that conflict with their primary obligation to the patient.

Treatment options in knee osteoarthritis: the patient's perspective.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to (1) examine patient treatment preferences for knee osteoarthritis, (2) determine the influence of specific medication characteristics on patients' choices, and (3) examine whether patient preferences are consistent with current practice. METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis completed an interactive computer questionnaire administered during a face-to-face interview. We measured the relative impact of specific medication characteristics (including administration, risks, benefits, and cost) on patients' choice, and the percentage of patients preferring nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulfate, opioid derivatives, and capsaicin across varying risks, benefits, and costs. RESULTS: Of the characteristics studied, variation in the risk of common adverse effects and gastrointestinal ulcer had the greatest impact on patients' choice. Assuming patients are responsible for the full cost of their medications, over 40% prefer capsaicin. Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors become patients' preferred choice only if they are described as being 3 times as effective as capsaicin and are covered by insurance. Nonselective NSAIDs are among the least preferred options across all simulations. CONCLUSIONS: When evaluating multiple alternatives, many older patients with knee osteoarthritis are willing to forgo treatment effectiveness for a lower risk of adverse effects. The patient treatment preferences derived in this study conflict with the current widespread use of nonselective NSAIDs in older patients with arthritis.

Achieving goals in geriatric assessment: role of caregiver agreement and adherence to recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: To determine predictors of recommendation adherence and goal attainment of family caregivers of patients at a geriatric assessment center. DESIGN: One-year prospective cohort study. SETTING: Outpatient geriatric assessment center in Connecticut. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred consecutive new patients and their family caregivers. MEASUREMENTS: : Family caregivers were interviewed after geriatric assessment to ascertain their treatment goals for the patient. Medical records were reviewed to identify treatment recommendations. Family caregivers were interviewed 1 year later to assess adherence to recommendations and attainment of goals. RESULTS: Follow-up interviews were completed with 176 (88%) family caregivers. Common recommendations pertained to physician referral (71%), medications (46%), counseling/education (31%), diagnostic tests (30%), residential planning (26%), healthcare planning (21%), and community services (21%). Goal attainment was reported in 44% to 67% of the patient cases, depending on goal category. Caregiver agreement with recommendations predicted adherence to recommendations (adjusted relative risk (ARR)=1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.04-5.92) after adjusting for available clinical and demographic factors. In addition, adherence to recommendations predicted goal attainment in adjusted analyses (ARR=1.70, 95% CI=1.09-2.64). CONCLUSION: This study revealed a broad range of treatment recommendations in geriatric assessment and suggests that agreeing with recommendations can promote adherence and that adherence can promote goal attainment. Taken together, the results imply that articulating shared treatment recommendations may improve the quality of health care.

Burden of illness score for elderly persons: risk adjustment incorporating the cumulative impact of diseases, physiologic abnormalities, and functional impairments.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a new risk adjustment index-the Burden of Illness Score for Elderly Persons (BISEP)-which integrates multiple domains, including diseases, physiologic abnormalities, and functional impairments. RESEARCH DESIGN SUBJECTS: The index was developed in a prospective cohort of 525 patients aged > or = 70 years from the medicine service of a university hospital. The index was validated in a cohort of 1246 patients aged > or = 65 years from 27 hospitals. The outcome was 1-year mortality. RESULTS: Five risk factors were selected from diagnosis, laboratory, and functional status axes: high-risk diagnoses, albumin < or = 3.5 mg/dL, creatinine >1.5 mg/dL, dementia, and walking impairment. The BISEP score (range 0-7) created four groups of increasing risk: group I (score 0-1), group II (2), group III (3), and group IV (> or = 4). In the development cohort, where overall mortality was 154/525 (29%), 1-year mortality rates increased significantly across each risk group, from 8% to 24%, 51%, and 74%, in groups I to IV respectively (chi(2) trend, = 0.001)--an overall 17-fold increased risk by hazard ratio. The c-statistic for the final model was 0.83. Corresponding rates in the validation cohort, where overall mortality was 488/1246 (39%), were 5%, 17%, 33%, and 61% in groups I to IV, respectively (chi(2) trend, = 0.001)-an overall 18-fold increased risk by hazard ratio. The c-statistic for the final model was 0.77. In each cohort, sequential addition of variables from different sources (eg, administrative, laboratory, and chart) substantially improved model fit and predictive accuracy. BISEP had significantly superior mortality prediction compared with five widely used measures. CONCLUSIONS: BISEP provides a useful new risk adjustment system for hospitalized older persons. Although index performance using different data sources has been evaluated, the full BISEP model, incorporating disease, laboratory, and functional impairment information, demonstrates the best performance.

Development and validation of a risk-adjustment index for older patients: the high-risk diagnoses for the elderly scale.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a risk-adjustment index for 1-year mortality specific to older people, based on administrative discharge diagnoses. DESIGN: Two prospective cohort studies, in tandem. The index developed in the initial cohort was subsequently validated in a separate cohort. SETTING: General medicine service of a university teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: For the development cohort, 524 hospitalized general medical patients aged 70 and older. For the validation cohort, 852 comparable patients. MEASUREMENTS: Administrative diagnosis data were used to construct the proposed index and several other widely used indices (Deyo-adapted Charlson; Acute Physiology, Age, Chronic Health Evaluation III conditions; total number of diagnoses; All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups; and Disease Staging). We used receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling to compare our proposed index with the other indices with respect to predictive accuracy and strength of association with 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The High-Risk Diagnoses for the Elderly Scale was developed using 10 high-risk medical diagnoses. Individual condition weights, based on the magnitude of 1-year mortality risk, ranged from 1 (pneumonia, diabetes mellitus with end-organ damage) to 6 (lymphoma/leukemia); possible index scores ranged from 0 to 27. Mortality rates for patients categorized into four risk groups based on the index were 9.5%, 31.8%, 46.4%, and 73.6% in the development cohort (C statistic = 0.76), and 9.9%, 24.3%, 33.6%, and 50.8% in the validation subjects (C statistic = 0.68). The new index was a stronger predictor of mortality than several widely used measures. CONCLUSION: The High-Risk Diagnoses for the Elderly Scale, based on readily available administrative data,is a simple, accurate system for prediction of 1-year mortality in older hospitalized patients that demonstrated generalizability to an independent sample. Future studies are needed to test this index in other settings and populations.