Quality of care delivered by fee-for-service and DRG hospitals in Switzerland in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

PRINCIPLES: Reimbursement for inpatient treatment in Switzerland is in transition. While hospitals in some cantons already use Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG) based systems for hospital financing, others use fee-for-service (FFS) based systems, a situation that provides the opportunity to perform a head-to-head comparison between the two reimbursement systems. The aim of this analysis was to compare reimbursement systems with regard to length of hospital stay (LOS) and patient outcomes in a cohort of community-acquired pneumonia patients from a previous prospective multicentre study in Switzerland. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of 925 patients with community-acquired pneumonia from a previous randomised-controlled trial. We calculated multivariate regression models adjusted for age, gender, comorbidities and severity of illness (using the Pneumonia Severity Index) and accounting for clustering within hospitals to compare LOS and outcomes between FFS (n = 4) or DRG hospitals (n = 2). RESULTS: LOS in DRG hospitals was significantly shorter compared to FFS hospitals (8.4 vs 10.3 days, absolute difference 1.9 days [95%CI 0.8-3.1]). This was confirmed in multivariate adjusted Cox models (hazard ratio 1.2 [95% 1.1-1.3]). There were no differences in 30-day and 18-month mortality rates (adjusted odds ratio 1.7 [95% 0.9-3.2] and 1.3 [95% 0.9-1.9]) or recurrence rates within 30 days (adjusted odds ratio 0.8 [95% 0.4-1.7]). Also, no differences were found in the rate of still ongoing clinical symptoms at 30 days, satisfaction with the discharge process and quality of life measures at 30 days of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study focusing on community-acquired pneumonia patients with different severities found a 20% shorter LOS in hospitals with DRG financing compared to FFS hospitals without apparent harmful effects on patient outcomes, satisfaction with care and different quality of life measures. Further studies are required to validate these findings for other medical and surgical patient populations.

A computer-based intervention for improving the appropriateness of antiepileptic drug level monitoring.

We designed and implemented 2 automated, computerized screens for use at the time of antiepileptic drug (AED) test order entry to improve appropriateness by reminding physicians when a potentially redundant test was ordered and providing common indications for monitoring and pharmacokinetics of the specific AED. All computerized orders for inpatient serum AED levels during two 3-month periods were included in the study. During the 3-month period after implementation of the automated intervention, 13% of all AED tests ordered were canceled following computerized reminders. For orders appearing redundant, the cancellation rate was 27%. For nonredundant orders, 4% were canceled when information on specific AED monitoring and pharmacokinetics was provided. The cancellation rate was sustained after 4 years. There has been a 19.5% decrease in total AED testing volume since implementation of this intervention, despite a 19.3% increase in overall chemistry test volume. Inappropriateness owing to repeated testing before pharmacologic steady state was reached decreased from 54% of all AED orders to 14.6%. A simple, automated, activity-based intervention targeting a specific test-ordering behavior effectively reduced inappropriate laboratory testing. The sustained benefit supports the idea that computerized interventions may durably affect physician behavior. Computerized delivery of such evidence-based boundary guidelines can help narrow the gap between evidence and practice.