Spatial analysis of community service availability in rural Kentucky, United States.

This study examined community service provider (CSP) availability relative to neighborhood socioeconomic status and its association with health-related social needs in Eastern Kentucky, United States. We used GIS methods to generate 10-mile network service areas around addresses of 736 CSPs and 10,161 Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries screened August 2018-April 2020 in 27-county study region. We observed wide variation in CSP availability and an inverse relationship between CSP availability and rates of unemployment, poverty, and federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The CSPs appear to have higher availability in more affluent census block groups. We found a statistically significant negative relationship between CSP availability within 10 miles of a beneficiary's resident and the presence of food, housing, transportation needs. Our findings suggest that healthcare providers, government entities, and non-profit organizations should consider geographic accessibility to those most in need when making referral and funding decisions, particularly in rural communities.

Information exchange among providers and patient-centeredness in transitional care: A five-year retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Responding to the shift toward value-based care, hospitals engaged in widespread experimentation of implementing transitional care (TC) strategies to improve patient experience and reduce unnecessary readmissions. However, which groups of these strategies are most strongly associated with better outcomes remains unknown. METHODS: Using a retrospective longitudinal design, we collected hospitals' TC strategy implementation data for 370 U S. hospitals and obtained claims data for 2.4 million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized at them from 2009 to 2014. We applied estimated mixed-effects regression models controlling for patient, hospital, and community covariates to assess relationships between TC strategy groups and trends in hospitals' 30-day hospital readmissions, with observation stay and mortality rates as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Hospitals' adoption of TC groups was associated with higher readmission rates at baseline and larger readmission rate reductions compared to not adopting any of 5 TC groups. The TC group including timely information exchange across care settings, engaging patients and caregivers in education, and/or identifying and addressing patients' transition needs was associated with the largest reductions. Hospitals not implementing any of the 5 TC groups had higher mortality rates and lower observation stay rates throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that timely information sharing among providers across the care continuum and engaging patients in discharge planning and education may correspond with reduced readmissions. IMPLICATIONS: Our research suggests that hospitals responded to shifts in policy by implementing a diversity of TC strategy combinations; it also provides guidance regarding which combinations of TC strategies corresponded with larger readmission reductions.

Effects of Different Transitional Care Strategies on Outcomes after Hospital Discharge-Trust Matters, Too.

BACKGROUND: As health systems shift toward value-based care, strategies to reduce readmissions and improve patient outcomes become increasingly important. Despite extensive research, the combinations of transitional care (TC) strategies associated with best patient-centered outcomes remain uncertain. METHODS: Using an observational, prospective cohort study design, Project ACHIEVE sought to determine the association of different combinations of TC strategies with patient-reported and postdischarge health care utilization outcomes. Using purposive sampling, the research team recruited a diverse sample of short-term acute care and critical access hospitals in the United States (N = 42) and analyzed data on eligible Medicare beneficiaries (N = 7,939) discharged from their medical/surgical units. Using both hospital- and patient-reported TC strategy exposure data, the project compared patients "exposed" to each of five overlapping groups of TC strategies to their "control" counterparts. Primary outcomes included 30-day hospital readmissions, 7-day postdischarge emergency department (ED) visits and patient-reported physical and mental health, pain, and participation in daily activities. RESULTS: Participants averaged 72.3 years old (standard deviation =10.1), 53.4% were female, and most were White (78.9%). Patients exposed to one TC group (Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination) were less likely to have 30-day readmissions (risk ratio [RR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57-0.92, p < 0.001) or 7-day ED visits (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93, p < 0.001) and more likely to report excellent physical and mental health, greater participation in daily activities, and less pain (RR ranged from 1.11 to 1.15, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In concert with care coordination activities that bridge the transition from hospital to home, hospitals' clear communication and fostering of trust with patients were associated with better patient-reported outcomes and reduced health care utilization.

Understanding the groups of care transition strategies used by U.S. hospitals: an application of factor analytic and latent class methods.

BACKGROUND: After activation of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) in 2012, hospitals nationwide experimented broadly with the implementation of Transitional Care (TC) strategies to reduce hospital readmissions. Although numerous evidence-based TC models exist, they are often adapted to local contexts, rendering large-scale evaluation difficult. Little systematic evidence exists about prevailing implementation patterns of TC strategies among hospitals, nor which strategies in which combinations are most effective at improving patient outcomes. We aimed to identify and define combinations of TC strategies, or groups of transitional care activities, implemented among a large and diverse cohort of U.S. hospitals, with the ultimate goal of evaluating their comparative effectiveness. METHODS: We collected implementation data for 13 TC strategies through a nationwide, web-based survey of representatives from short-term acute-care and critical access hospitals (N = 370) and obtained Medicare claims data for patients discharged from participating hospitals. TC strategies were grouped separately through factor analysis and latent class analysis. RESULTS: We observed 348 variations in how hospitals implemented 13 TC strategies, highlighting the diversity of hospitals' TC strategy implementation. Factor analysis resulted in five overlapping groups of TC strategies, including those characterized by 1) medication reconciliation, 2) shared decision making, 3) identifying high risk patients, 4) care plan, and 5) cross-setting information exchange. We determined that the groups suggested by factor analysis results provided a more logical grouping. Further, groups of TC strategies based on factor analysis performed better than the ones based on latent class analysis in detecting differences in 30-day readmission trends. CONCLUSIONS: U.S. hospitals uniquely combine TC strategies in ways that require further evaluation. Factor analysis provides a logical method for grouping such strategies for comparative effectiveness analysis when the groups are dependent. Our findings provide hospitals and health systems 1) information about what groups of TC strategies are commonly being implemented by hospitals, 2) strengths associated with the factor analysis approach for classifying these groups, and ultimately, 3) information upon which comparative effectiveness trials can be designed. Our results further reveal promising targets for comparative effectiveness analyses, including groups incorporating cross-setting information exchange.

Improving evidence-based grouping of transitional care strategies in hospital implementation using statistical tools and expert review.

BACKGROUND: As health systems transition to value-based care, improving transitional care (TC) remains a priority. Hospitals implementing evidence-based TC models often adapt them to local contexts. However, limited research has evaluated which groups of TC strategies, or transitional care activities, commonly implemented by hospitals correspond with improved patient outcomes. In order to identify TC strategy groups for evaluation, we applied a data-driven approach informed by literature review and expert opinion. METHODS: Based on a review of evidence-based TC models and the literature, focus groups with patients and family caregivers identifying what matters most to them during care transitions, and expert review, the Project ACHIEVE team identified 22 TC strategies to evaluate. Patient exposure to TC strategies was measured through a hospital survey (N = 42) and prospective survey of patients discharged from those hospitals (N = 8080). To define groups of TC strategies for evaluation, we performed a multistep process including: using ACHIEVE'S prior retrospective analysis; performing exploratory factor analysis, latent class analysis, and finite mixture model analysis on hospital and patient survey data; and confirming results through expert review. Machine learning (e.g., random forest) was performed using patient claims data to explore the predictive influence of individual strategies, strategy groups, and key covariates on 30-day hospital readmissions. RESULTS: The methodological approach identified five groups of TC strategies that were commonly delivered as a bundle by hospitals: 1) Patient Communication and Care Management, 2) Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination, 3) Home-Based Trust, Plain language, and Coordination, 4) Patient/Family Caregiver Assessment and Information Exchange Among Providers, and 5) Assessment and Teach Back. Each TC strategy group comprises three to six, non-mutually exclusive TC strategies (i.e., some strategies are in multiple TC strategy groups). Results from random forest analyses revealed that TC strategies patients reported receiving were more important in predicting readmissions than TC strategies that hospitals reported delivering, and that other key co-variates, such as patient comorbidities, were the most important variables. CONCLUSION: Sophisticated statistical tools can help identify underlying patterns of hospitals' TC efforts. Using such tools, this study identified five groups of TC strategies that have potential to improve patient outcomes.

Value-based syncope evaluation and management: Perspectives of health care professionals on readiness, barriers and enablers.

BACKGROUND: Syncope is a common condition seen in the emergency department. Given the multitude of etiologies, research exists on the evaluation and management of syncope. Yet, physicians' approach to patients with syncope is variable and often not value based. The 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Patients with Syncope includes a focus on unnecessary medical testing. However, little research assesses implementation of the guidelines. METHODS: Mixed methods approach was applied. The targeted provider specialties include emergency medicine, hospital medicine and cardiology. The Evidence-based Practice Attitude Scale-36 and the Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment surveys were distributed to four different hospital sites. We then conducted focus groups and key informant interviews to obtain more information about clinicians' perceptions to guideline-based practice and barriers/facilitators to implementation. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were used for survey analysis. Two-stage coding was used to identify themes with NVivo. RESULTS: Analysis of surveys revealed that overall attitude toward evidence-based practices was moderate and implementation of new guidelines were seen as a burden, potentially decreasing compliance. There were differences across hospital settings. Five common themes emerged from interviews: uncertainty of a syncope diagnosis, rise of consumerism in health care, communication challenge with patient, provider differences in standardized care, and organizational processes to change. CONCLUSIONS: Despite recommendations for the use of syncope guidelines, adherence is suboptimal. Overcoming barriers to use will require a paradigm shift. A multifaceted approach and collaborative relationships are needed to adhere to the Guidelines to improve patient care and operational efficiency.

The Value of Innovation to Implementation Program (VI2P): A strategic approach to aligning and leveraging academic research and clinical care missions.

PROBLEM: Inefficient implementation of evidence-based care garners increasing attention as a source of suboptimal value of clinical care, and integration of quality improvement methodology into clinical practice represents a potential solution. Academic medical centers (AMCs) often have expertise in implementation science, yet it is not leveraged effectively to solve operational inefficiencies or to rapidly implement evidence-based practices (EBPs). APPROACH: To leverage in-house research expertise, the University of Kentucky (UK) College of Medicine and Center for Health Services Research (CHSR) launched a pilot awards program-Value of Innovation to Implementation Program (VI2P)-across its health system and six health professional colleges. Criteria for awards included a transdisciplinary research team and addressing health disparity issues faced by Kentucky. Outcome measures included EBP adoption and implementation and future funding. OUTCOMES: The VI2P produced 26 transdisciplinary teams that submitted letters of intent. Ten teams were invited to submit full proposal, and four projects were selected for award, spanning the entire continuum of health-impact research. Three nonawarded projects were implemented and prompted system redesign for an "implementation research living laboratory." A Workgroup for ImplementatioN Science (WINS) was established to forge transdisciplinary teams to pursue federal grant funding yielding proposals totaling $17.17 million submitted, $4.38 million awarded, and $5.97 million under review. Junior faculty were encouraged to pursue implementation science as a research focus. NEXT STEPS: UK WINS will continue serve as the hub for dissemination and implementation researchers at UK. On the basis of the enthusiasm expressed by multiple groups and many inquiries about the future training opportunities at UK, we plan to develop a tailored dissemination and implementation (D&I) training program to build research and practice capacity at UK.

Redesigning systems to improve teamwork and quality for hospitalized patients (RESET): study protocol evaluating the effect of mentored implementation to redesign clinical microsystems.

BACKGROUND: A number of challenges impede our ability to consistently provide high quality care to patients hospitalized with medical conditions. Teams are large, team membership continually evolves, and physicians are often spread across multiple units and floors. Moreover, patients and family members are generally poorly informed and lack opportunities to partner in decision making. Prior studies have tested interventions to redesign aspects of the care delivery system for hospitalized medical patients, but the majority have evaluated the effect of a single intervention. We believe these interventions represent complementary and mutually reinforcing components of a redesigned clinical microsystem. Our specific objective for this study is to implement a set of evidence-based complementary interventions across a range of clinical microsystems, identify factors and strategies associated with successful implementation, and evaluate the impact on quality. METHODS: The RESET project uses the Advanced and Integrated MicroSystems (AIMS) interventions. The AIMS interventions consist of 1) Unit-based Physician Teams, 2) Unit Nurse-Physician Co-leadership, 3) Enhanced Interprofessional Rounds, 4) Unit-level Performance Reports, and 5) Patient Engagement Activities. Four hospital sites were chosen to receive guidance and resources as they implement the AIMS interventions. Each study site has assembled a local leadership team, consisting of a physician and nurse, and receives mentorship from a physician and nurse with experience in leading similar interventions. Primary outcomes include teamwork climate, assessed using the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire, and adverse events using the Medicare Patient Safety Monitoring System (MPSMS). RESET uses a parallel group study design and two group pretest-posttest analyses for primary outcomes. We use a multi-method approach to collect and triangulate qualitative data collected during 3 visits to study sites. We will use cross-case comparisons to consider how site-specific contextual factors interact with the variation in the intensity and fidelity of implementation to affect teamwork and patient outcomes. DISCUSSION: The RESET study provides mentorship and resources to assist hospitals as they implement complementary and mutually reinforcing components to redesign the clinical microsystems caring for medical patients. Our findings will be of interest and directly applicable to all hospitals providing care to patients with medical conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03745677 . Retrospectively registered on November 19, 2018.

Meta-Analysis Comparing the Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-Benefit of Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulants Versus Enoxaparin Thromboprophylaxis to Prevent Venous Thromboembolism Among Hospitalized Patients.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potentially fatal complication of hospitalization. Thromboprophylaxis using subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) can result in local irritation, pain, and ecchymoses, leading to nonadherence. Direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an alternative, but their efficacy and safety for short-term inpatient-only use versus LMWH, in medically hospitalized patients, has not been rigorously assessed. We performed a systematic review with meta-analyses and exploratory cost effectiveness analysis of Phase III randomized controlled trials comparing DOACs to LMWH for VTE prophylaxis to determine the risk and benefit of each. The primary efficacy end point (composite of total VTE and any-cause mortality) occurred in 1,321 of 10,978 (11.4%) of patients receiving DOAC prophylaxis and 1,084 of 10,600 (10.2%) with LMWH (odds ratio [OR] 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 1.13). The primary safety end point (composite of major bleeding and clinically relevant bleeding) occurred in 519 of 16,131 (3.2%) of patients receiving DOACs and 381 of 14,616 (2.6%) with LMWH (OR 1.12; 95%CI 0.83 to 1.53). Subgroup analyses for efficacy (n = 9,233) and safety (n = 12,584) was conducted on patients randomized to Apixaban or LMWH. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 294 of 4618 (6.4%) patients on Apixaban and 383 of 4615 (8.3%) on Enoxaparin (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.24). Major and clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 157 of 6278 (2.50%) and 185 of 6,306 (2.9%), respectively (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.26). Exploratory cost effectiveness analysis suggested that Apixaban compared with Enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis could result in long-term cost savings. In conclusion, this systematic review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis, stratified by type of patients and drug, indicates noninferiority of DOACs in efficacy, safety, and cost for short-term VTE thromboprophylaxis among patients hospitalized for medical illness.

Preventability of Early Versus Late Hospital Readmissions in a National Cohort of General Medicine Patients.

Background: Many experts believe that hospitals with more frequent readmissions provide lower-quality care, but little is known about how the preventability of readmissions might change over the postdischarge time frame. Objective: To determine whether readmissions within 7 days of discharge differ from those between 8 and 30 days after discharge with respect to preventability. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: 10 academic medical centers in the United States. Patients: 822 adults readmitted to a general medicine service. Measurements: For each readmission, 2 site-specific physician adjudicators used a structured survey instrument to determine whether it was preventable and measured other characteristics. Results: Overall, 36.2% of early readmissions versus 23.0% of late readmissions were preventable (median risk difference, 13.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 5.5 to 26.4 percentage points]). Hospitals were identified as better locations for preventing early readmissions (47.2% vs. 25.5%; median risk difference, 22.8 percentage points [interquartile range, 17.9 to 31.8 percentage points]), whereas outpatient clinics (15.2% vs. 6.6%; median risk difference, 10.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 4.6 to 12.2 percentage points]) and home (19.4% vs. 14.0%; median risk difference, 5.6 percentage points [interquartile range, -6.1 to 17.1 percentage points]) were better for preventing late readmissions. Limitation: Physician adjudicators were not blinded to readmission timing, community hospitals were not included in the study, and readmissions to nonstudy hospitals were not included in the results. Conclusion: Early readmissions were more likely to be preventable and amenable to hospital-based interventions. Late readmissions were less likely to be preventable and were more amenable to ambulatory and home-based interventions. Primary Funding Source: Association of American Medical Colleges.

The impact of health and health insurance literacy on access to care for Hispanic/Latino communities.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of health literacy (HL) and health insurance literacy (HIL) on health insurance status and access to health care services for Spanish-speaking communities living in Massachusetts. METHODS: A total of 139 surveys (descriptive, knowledge-based HIL questions, and Short Assessment of Health Literacy in Spanish) and 30 semi-structured interviews were collected and analyzed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney U test, and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The majority of participants had inadequate HL (56%) and HIL (93%). There were differences in HL scores (t = 4.1; p < .0001) between the insured (M = 12.3, SD = 5.7) and uninsured (M = 7.9, SD = 6.7) and differences (t = 1.9; p = .05) between those with adequate HIL (M = 14.3, SD = 4.3) and inadequate HIL (M = 10.2, SD = 6.6). Participants who were uninsured (MW U = 37.6; p < .0001) and who had inadequate HL (MW U = 5.2; p = .02) were more likely to have never accessed health care in the U.S. Participants who had never accessed health care were 93% less likely to be insured and those with adequate HL were three times more likely to be insured. CONCLUSIONS: Health literacy and HIL are closely associated with insurance status and access to health care for Spanish-speaking communities, indicating the need for further research and enhanced public health efforts to improve knowledge and awareness around navigating health care systems.

Components of Comprehensive and Effective Transitional Care.

Transitional care (TC) has received widespread attention from researchers, health system leaders, clinicians, and policy makers as they attempt to improve health outcomes and reduce preventable hospital readmissions, yet little is known about the critical elements of effective TC and how they relate to patients' and caregivers' needs and experiences. To address this gap, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) funded a national study, Achieving patient-centered Care and optimized Health In care transitions by Evaluating the Value of Evidence (Project ACHIEVE). A primary aim of the study is the identification of TC components that yield desired patient and caregiver outcomes. Project ACHIEVE established a multistakeholder workgroup to recommend essential TC components for vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries. Guided by a review of published evidence, the workgroup identified and defined a preliminary set of components and then analyzed how well the set aligned with real-world patients' and caregivers' experiences. Through this process, the workgroup identified eight TC components: patient engagement, caregiver engagement, complexity and medication management, patient education, caregiver education, patients' and caregivers' well-being, care continuity, and accountability. Although the degree of attention given to each component will vary based on the specific needs of patients and caregivers, workgroup members agree that health systems need to address all components to ensure optimal TC for all Medicare beneficiaries.

Engaging Patients and Caregivers to Design Transitional Care Management Services at a Minority Serving Institution.

Limited socioeconomic resources contribute to high readmission rates at minority serving institutions (MSIs). A better understanding of patient-level factors and need for patient navigators could inform approaches to enhance care transitions tailored to these vulnerable patient populations. We sought to understand the perspectives of patients and their caregivers about hospital to home transitions from an MSI, as well as their attitudes about patient navigators to facilitate care transitions. We conducted qualitative research using focus groups (FGs)-five disease-specific patient FGs and two caregiver FGs, including 23 patients and 10 caregivers. Findings support the need for additional services to address: (1) gaps in the hospital discharge; (2) socioeconomic resources; (3) access to post-discharge care; (4) patient's health care seeking behaviors; (5) patient anxiety; (6) self-management education; and (7) social supports for patients and caregivers. While caregivers uniformly expressed interest in patient navigators, support for navigators among patients was more variable.

Project ACHIEVE - using implementation research to guide the evaluation of transitional care effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Poorly managed hospital discharges and care transitions between health care facilities can cause poor outcomes for both patients and their caregivers. Unfortunately, the usual approach to health care delivery does not support continuity and coordination across the settings of hospital, doctors' offices, home or nursing homes. Though complex efforts with multiple components can improve patient outcomes and reduce 30-day readmissions, research has not identified which components are necessary. Also we do not know how delivery of core components may need to be adjusted based on patient, caregiver, setting or characteristics of the community, or how system redesign can be accelerated. METHODS/DESIGN: Project ACHIEVE focuses on diverse Medicare populations such as individuals with multiple chronic diseases, patients with low health literacy/numeracy and limited English proficiency, racial and ethnic minority groups, low-income groups, residents of rural areas, and individuals with disabilities. During the first phase, we will use focus groups to identify the transitional care outcomes and components that matter most to patients and caregivers to inform development and validation of assessment instruments. During the second phase, we will evaluate the comparative effectiveness of multi-component care transitions programs occurring across the U.S. Using a mixed-methods approach for this evaluation, we will study historical (retrospective) and current and future (prospective) groups of patients, caregivers and providers using site visits, surveys, and clinical and claims data. In this natural experiment observational study, we use a fractional factorial study design to specify comparators and estimate the individual and combined effects of key transitional care components. DISCUSSION: Our study will determine which evidence-based transitional care components and/or clusters most effectively produce patient and caregiver desired outcomes overall and among diverse patient and caregiver populations in different healthcare settings. Using the results, we will develop concrete, actionable recommendations regarding how best to implement these strategies. Finally, this work will provide tools for hospitals, community-based organizations, patients, caregivers, clinicians and other stakeholders to help them make informed decisions about which strategies are most effective and how best to implement them in their communities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered as NCT02354482 on clinicaltrials.gov on 1/29/2015.

The Prevalence of Inpatients at 33 U.S. Hospitals Appropriate for and Receiving Referral to Palliative Care.

BACKGROUND: The extent of unmet need for palliative care in U.S. hospitals remains largely unknown. We conducted a multisite cross-sectional, retrospective point prevalence analysis to determine the size and characteristics of the population of inpatients at 33 U.S. hospitals who were appropriate for palliative care referral, as well as the percentage of these patients who were referred for and/or received palliative care services. We also conducted a qualitative assessment of barriers and facilitators to referral, focusing on organizational characteristics that might influence palliative care referral practices. METHODS: Patients appropriate for palliative care referral were defined as adult (≥18 years) patients with any diagnosis of a poor-prognosis cancer, New York Heart Association class IV congestive heart failure, or oxygen-dependent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who had inpatient status in 1 of 33 hospitals on May 13, 2014. Qualitative assessment involved interviews of palliative care team members and nonpalliative care frontline providers. RESULTS: Nearly 19% of inpatients on the point prevalence day were deemed appropriate for palliative care referral. Of these, approximately 39% received a palliative care referral or services. Delivery of palliative care services to these patients varied widely among participating hospitals, ranging from approximately 12% to more than 90%. Factors influencing differences in referral practices included nonstandardized perceptions of referral criteria and variation in palliative care service structures. CONCLUSION: This study provides useful information to guide providers, administrators, researchers, and policy experts in planning for optimal provision of palliative care services to those in need.

"SWARMing" to Improve Patient Care: A Novel Approach to Root Cause Analysis.

BACKGROUND: When errors occur with adverse events or near misses, root cause analysis (RCA) is the standard approach to investigate the "how" and "why" of system vulnerabilities. However, even for facilities experienced in conducting RCAs, the process can be fraught with inconsistencies; provoke discomfort for participants; and fail to lead to meaningful, focused discussions of system issues that may have contributed to events. In 2009 University of Kentucky HealthCare Lexington developed a novel rapid approach to RCAs-colloquially called "SWARMing"--to establish a consistent approach to investigate adverse or other undesirable events. METHODS: In SWARMs, which are conducted without unnecessary delay after an event, an interdisciplinary team undertakes thoughtful analysis of events reported by frontline staff. The SWARM process consist of five key steps: (1) introductory explanation of the process; (2) introduction of everyone in the room; (3) review of the facts that prompted the SWARM; (4) discussion of what happened, with investigation of the underlying systems factors; and (5) conclusion, with proposed focus areas for action and assignment of task leaders with specific deliverables and completion dates. RESULTS: Since its implementation, incident reporting increased by 52%-from an average of 608 incidents per month (June-December 2011) to an average of 923 per month (January-May 2014). The overall health system experienced a 37% decrease in the observed-to-expected mortality ratio-from 1.17 (October 2010) to 0.74 (April 2015). CONCLUSION: SWARMs, more than an error-analysis exercise or simple RCA, represent an organizational-messaging, culture-changing, and capacity-building effort to address the challenges of creating and implementing processes that serve to promote transparency and a culture of safety.

The characteristics of patients frequently admitted to academic medical centers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The recent intense attention to hospital readmissions and their implications for quality, safety, and reimbursement necessitates understanding specific subsets of readmitted patients. Frequently admitted patients, defined as patients who are admitted 5 or more times within 1 year, may have some distinguishing characteristics that require novel solutions. METHODS: A comprehensive administrative database (University HealthSystem Consortium's Clinical Data Base/Resource Manager) was analyzed to identify demographic, social, and clinical characteristics of frequently admitted patients in 101 US academic medical centers. RESULTS: We studied 28,291 frequently admitted patients with 180,185 admissions over a 1-year period (2011-2012). These patients comprise 1.6% of all patients, but account for 8% of all admissions and 7% of direct costs. Their admissions are driven by multiple chronic conditions; compared to other hospitalized patients, they have significantly more comorbidities (an average of 7.1 vs 2.5), and 84% of their admissions are to medical services. A minority, but significantly more than other patients, have comorbidities of psychosis or substance abuse. Moreover, although they are slightly more likely than other patients to be on Medicaid or to be uninsured (27.6% vs 21.6%), nearly three-quarters have private or Medicare coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who are frequently admitted to US academic medical centers are likely to have multiple complex chronic conditions and may have behavioral comorbidities that mediate their health behaviors, resulting in acute episodes requiring hospitalization. This information can be used to identify solutions for preventing repeat hospitalization for this small group of patients who consume a highly disproportionate share of healthcare resources.

Medical Inpatients' Use of Information Technology: Characterizing the Potential to Share Information Electronically.

Hospitalized patients frequently have an incomplete understanding of important aspects of their care. Patient-facing technologies, increasingly used in outpatient settings to exchange information between patient and provider, may have utility in the hospital setting. We conducted structured interviews of hospitalized medical patients to assess current use of information technology, gauge interest in receiving information electronically, and prioritize potential content options. Overall, 150 of 175 (86%) eligible patients completed interviews. A majority (69%) of patients used the Internet prior to hospital admission. One third (32%) of patients had used the Internet during their hospitalization with half of those reporting use for health information. Overall, nearly half (42%) reported interest in receiving health information electronically during hospitalization and a majority (59%) were interested in receiving health information electronically after hospitalization. Patients expressed high interest in receiving information to help them learn more about diagnoses and treatments, medication lists, lists of planned tests, and summaries of completed tests and procedures. Many general medical patients are interested in receiving health information electronically from hospital providers. Our findings support the development of hospital-based patient-facing health information technologies and prioritize content options patients find most beneficial.