Rationale and design of: A Randomized tRial of Expedited transfer to a cardiac arrest center for non-ST elevation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: The ARREST randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a global public health issue. There is wide variation in both regional and inter-hospital survival rates from OHCA and overall survival remains poor at 7%. Regionalization of care into cardiac arrest centers (CAC) improves outcomes following cardiac arrest from ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) through concentration of services and greater provider experience. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) recommends delivery of all post-arrest patients to a CAC, but that randomized controlled trials are necessary in patients without ST elevation (STE). METHODS/DESIGN: Following completion of a pilot randomized trial to assess safety and feasibility of conducting a large-scale randomized controlled trial in patients following OHCA of presumed cardiac cause without STE, we present the rationale and design of A Randomized tRial of Expedited transfer to a cardiac arrest center for non-ST elevation OHCA (ARREST). In total 860 patients will be enrolled and randomized (1:1) to expedited transfer to CAC (24/7 access to interventional cardiology facilities, cooling and goal-directed therapies) or to the current standard of care, which comprises delivery to the nearest emergency department. Primary outcome is 30-day all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes are 30-day and 3-month neurological status and 3, 6 and 12-month mortality. Patients will be followed up for one year after enrolment. CONCLUSION: Post-arrest care is time-critical, requires a multi-disciplinary approach and may be more optimally delivered in centers with greater provider experience. This trial would help to demonstrate if regionalization of post-arrest care to CACs reduces mortality in patients without STE, which could dramatically reshape emergency care provision.

Beyond Socks, Signs, and Alarms: A Reflective Accountability Model for Fall Prevention.

Despite standard fall precautions, including nonskid socks, signs, alarms, and patient instructions, our 48-bed cardiac intermediate care unit (CICU) had a 41% increase in the rate of falls (from 2.2 to 3.1 per 1,000 patient days) and a 65% increase in the rate of falls with injury (from 0.75 to 1.24 per 1,000 patient days) between fiscal years (FY) 2012 and 2013. An evaluation of the falls data conducted by a cohort of four clinical nurses found that the majority of falls occurred when patients were unassisted by nurses, most often during toileting. Supported by the leadership team, the clinical nurses developed an accountability care program that required nurses to use reflective practice to evaluate each fall, including sending an e-mail to all staff members with both the nurse's and the patient's perspective on the fall, as well as the nurse's reflection on what could have been done to prevent the fall. Other program components were a postfall huddle and guidelines for assisting and remaining with fall risk patients for the duration of their toileting. Placing the accountability for falls with the nurse resulted in decreases in the unit's rates of falls and falls with injury of 55% (from 3.1 to 1.39 per 1,000 patient days) and 72% (from 1.24 to 0.35 per 1,000 patient days), respectively, between FY2013 and FY2014. Prompt call bell response (less than 60 seconds) also contributed to the goal of fall prevention.

The burden of acute myocardial infarction after a regional cardiovascular center project in Korea.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of a government-directed regional cardiovascular center (RCVC) project on the length of stay (LOS) and medical costs due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI). DESIGN: A retrospective claim data review. SETTING: Forty hospitals including four RCVCs in Korea. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1469 AMI patients who visited a RCVC in two regions between February 2009 and December 2011. INTERVENTIONS: RCVC project has been fostering specialized center by region for management of cardiovascular disease. It has built a system that could receive intensive care quickly within 3 h when disease occurred. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in the LOS and cost were evaluated using the difference-in-differences (DIDs) method combined with propensity score matching (1:1) and multilevel analysis with adjustment for patient's and institutional factors. RESULTS: The net effect of RCVC project implementation showed decline of LOS (-0.71 days) and total medical costs (-797 US dollars) by DID. After the RCVC project, the LOS for patients with AMI hospitalized in a RCVC was decreased by 8.9% (ß = -0.094, P = 0.041) compared with patients hospitalized in a hospital not designed as a RCVC. Compared with costs before the RCVC project, they were decreased by 11.5% (ß = -0.122, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: We provided evidence regarding the change in the societal burden due to AMI after regionalization. Although there was a reduction of LOS and direct medical costs reported in limited number of regionalized hospitals, in the long term we can anticipate an expanding impact in all regionalized hospitals.

NICE recommendations for the assessment of stable chest pain: assessing the early economic and service impact in the rapid-access chest pain service.

BACKGROUND: In 2010, guidelines published by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) suggested a change in the way patients with stable chest pain of suspected cardiac origin were investigated. These guidelines removed exercise treadmill testing from routine use and introduced cardiac CT to regular use. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether these guidelines had improved our service provision by reducing the number of further investigations required to make a diagnosis, and to see if our costs had increased now that the less expensive exercise treadmill tests were not recommended. METHODS: Clinic letters were used to assess patients pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease for two six-month cohorts of consecutive patients seen in the rapid access chest pain clinic (January-June 2010 and July-December 2011) using NICE published methodology, and to ascertain which investigations patients had. Using NICE modelled costs, we generated comparative hypothetical costs for each cohort and an average cost per patient. RESULTS: In the January-June 2010 cohort, 435 patients with chest pain were seen, and in July-December 2011, 334 patients were seen. In the pre-NICE guidelines cohort, 23% of patients required two investigations as compared with 11.4% in the post-NICE guidelines cohort, with no patient requiring three investigations as compared with 3% in the original cohort. There was no significant increase in costs per patient in the post-NICE guidance group. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing NICE guidance reduced the number of investigations needed per patient, and did not prove more expensive for our department in the short term.

Cost implications of implementing NICE guideline on chest pain in rapid access chest pain clinics: an audit and cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: Implementing the recently published National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical guideline on chest pain (CG95) in rapid access chest pain clinics (RACPCs) could significantly impact on overall cost, while introducing new technology like cardiac computed tomography (CT) scanning. With the National Health Service (NHS) under pressure to make £20 billion savings, applying CG95 in RACPCs could be challenging. An audit enabled us to assess the cost implications. METHODS: A retrospective audit was performed of 204 consecutive cases attending Croydon RACPC from 13 July to 21 September 2010, on risk factors, demographics and planned first-line investigations. CG95 and three alternative strategies were mapped on the sample, and the estimated cost and volume of first-line investigations were compared with actual RACPC activities and costs. RESULTS: Application of CG95 resulted in significant increases in cost and volume of functional testing, cardiac CT scan angiography and invasive coronary angiography, with 42-43% overall cost increases. The application of three alternative strategies resulted in annual cost increases ranging from 0.1 to 33%. An alternative cost analysis showed annual savings of up to 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing NICE CG95 can significantly increase the cost of RACPCs but alternative strategies could enable the introduction of new technology without significant cost increases and even significant savings.

Auditoria de contas em um hospital de ensino especializado em cardiologia e pneumologia: um estudo de caso / Audit of Accounts in a Specialized Cardiology and Pneumology Teaching Hospital: a case study

As instituições hospitalares que prestam serviços às operadoras de planos de saúde investem na auditoria de contas visando à adequada remuneração do atendimento prestado. No momento da pré-análise das contas a equipe de auditoria realiza correções para fundamentar a cobrança dos procedimentos, evitar glosas e perdas de faturamento. Nesta perspectiva esta pesquisa objetivou verificar os itens componentes das contas dos pacientes internados, conferidos por enfermeiras, que mais receberam ajustes no momento da pré-análise; identificar o impacto dos ajustes no faturamento das contas analisadas pela equipe de auditoria (médicos e enfermeiras) do hospital após a pré-analise; calcular o faturamento que esta equipe consegue ajustar nas contas e identificar as glosas relacionadas aos itens por ela conferidos. Tratou-se de uma pesquisa exploratória, descritiva, retrospectiva, de abordagem quantitativa na modalidade de estudo de caso, desenvolvida no Instituto do Coração (InCor) do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo. Foram estudadas 2.613 contas pré-analisadas pela equipe de auditoria do InCor no período de janeiro a dezembro de 2011. O faturamento concentrou-se em 04 (62,9%) das 34 operadoras de planos de saúde credenciadas. Houve predominância da operadora A (27,6%), porém o maior valor médio obtido por conta referiu-se a operadora D com R$ 19.187,50. Os itens mais incluídos nas contas pelas enfermeiras foram gases (90,5%); materiais de internação (85%) e serviço de enfermagem (83,2%). Materiais de Hemodinâmica com média de R$ 1.055,90 (DP± 3.953,45); gases com média de R$ 707, 91 (DP± 843,95) e equipamentos com média de R$ 689, 42 (DP± 1145,20) constituíram os itens de maior impacto financeiro nesses ajustes.Os itens mais excluídos das contas referiram-se a medicamentos de internação (41,2%); equipamentos (28%) e serviços de enfermagem (17%). Em relação aos ajustes negativos os itens que tiveram maior impacto financeiro foram os materiais de Hemodinâmica com média de R$ 3.860,15 (DP± 15.220,80); medicamentos utilizados na Hemodinâmica com média de R$ 1.983,04 (DP± 8.324,42) e gases com média de R$ 1.048,51 (DP± 3.025,53). As enfermeiras incluíram R$ 1.877.168,64 e excluíram R$ 1.155.351,36 e os médicos incluíram R$ 563.927,46 e excluíram R$ 657.190,19. Caso não fosse realizada a pré-análise, haveria a perda de R$ 628.554,55 no faturamento. Dentre as contas analisadas 91,42% receberam ajustes, sendo 57,59% positivos, com média de R$ 1.340,75 (DP±2.502,93) e 33,83% negativos, com média de R$ 1.571,58 (DP± 5.990,51). O total de glosas dos itens analisados por enfermeiras ou por médicos, bem como em itens examinados por ambos, correspondeu em média a R$ 380,51 (DP±1.533,05). As glosas referentes aos itens conferidos por médicos perfizeram um total médio de R$ 311,94 (DP±646,86) e as glosas referentes aos itens conferidos por enfermeiras de R$ 255,84 (DP± 1.636,76). O excesso de ajustes evidenciou a deficiência e a falta de uniformidade dos registros da equipe de saúde. Considera-se que esta pesquisa representa a possibilidade de avanço no conhecimento acerca da auditoria de contas hospitalares à medida que investigou o processo de pré-análise realizado por enfermeiras e médicos auditores.

Hospitals that provide services to health plan companies invest in the audit of accounts aiming to provide adequate remuneration of their service. The pre-analysis of accounts is when the audit team makes corrections to determine the foundations for billing the procedures, and to avoid disallowances and revenue losses. From that perspective, the objective of the present study was to identify the patient bill items that were most corrected after being submitted to pre-analysis; identify the impact of those corrections on the revenue of accounts that were analyzed by the hospitals audit team (physicians and nurses) after the pre-analysis; calculate the revenue that the referred team is able to correct, and identify the disallowances related to the items they checked. This exploratory, descriptive, retrospective case study was performed at the Heart Institute (InCor) of the University of São Paulo School of Medicine Clinics Hospital (HCFMUSP) using a quantitative approach. The study included a total of 2,613 accounts that had been pre-analyzed by the InCor audit team in the period spanning January to December of 2011. The revenue was concentrated in four (62.9%) of the 34 credited health plan companies. There was predominance by company A (27.6%), but the highest mean value per account was obtained by company D, with R$ 19,187.50. The items most often included in the accounts by the nurses were gauzes (90.5%); hospitalization materials (85%) and nursing care (83.2%). Hemodynamics materials, with a mean R$ 1,055.90 (SD± 3,953.45); gauzes, with a mean R$ 707.91 (SD± 843.95), and equipment, with a mean R$ 689.42 (SD± 1145.20) were the items with the strongest financial impact on the corrections.The items most often excluded from the accounts referred to hospitalization medications (41.2%); equipment (28%) and nursing care (17%). Regarding the negative changes, the items with the strongest financial impact were Hemodynamics materials, with a mean R$ 3,860.15 (SD± 15,220.80); medications used in Hemodynamics, with a mean R$ 1,983.04 (SD± 8,324.42), and gauzes, with a mean R$ 1,048.51 (SD± 3,025.53). Nurses included a total of R$ 1,877,168.64, and excluded R$ 1,155,351.36, while physicians included R$ 563,927.46 and excluded R$ 657,190.19. If the pre-analysis had not been performed, there would have been a revenue loss of R$ 628,554.55. Of all the accounts submitted to analysis, 91.42% were corrected, of which 57.59% were positive, with a mean R$ 1,340.75 (SD±2,502.93) and 33.83% were negative, with a mean R$ 1,571.58 (SD± 5,990.51). Regarding disallowances, the final sum considering the items analyzed by nurses, physicians or both corresponded to a mean R$ 380.51 (SD±1,533.05). The disallowances referring to the items analyzed by physicians added up to a mean total of R$ 311.94 (SD±646.86), and those referring to the items analyzed by nurses to R$ 255.84 (SD± 1,636.76). The excessive number of corrections showed the lack of uniformity in the records made by the health team. This study represents a possibility of knowledge advancement regarding the audit of hospital accounts as it investigated the pre-analysis process performed by nurses and physicians.

Is quality of cardiac hospital care a public or private good?

BACKGROUND: There are many studies examining the effects of financial pressure from different payment sources on hospital quality of care, but most have assumed that quality of care is a public good in that payment changes from one payer will affect all hospital patients rather than just those directly associated with the payer. Although quality of hospital care can be either a public or private good, few studies have tested which of these scenarios are more likely to hold. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether the change in the magnitude of in-hospital mortality for Medicare and managed care patients is different based on financial pressure resulting from the Balanced Budget Act and growing managed care market penetration; and to examine what role hospital competition may play in affecting these changes. DATA AND METHODS: The unit of analysis for the study was the hospital. Multiple data sources were used including the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality State Inpatient Databases, American Hospital Association Annual Surveys, Area Resource File, and health maintenance organization data from InterStudy. A difference-in-difference-in-difference model was applied for a 2-period panel design. RESULTS: In general, Balanced Budget Act financial pressure and managed care market share did not magnify the difference in in-hospital mortality rates between Medicare and managed care patients. The results suggest that quality of cardiac care in the hospital setting is more likely to be a public good; however, more investigation using other quality indicators and the role of hospital competition under different payment systems is recommended.

Problems in the organization of care for patients with adult congenital heart disease.

The prevalence of congenital heart disease among adults in Europe, or in any country in Europe, is not known. This is due to a lack of agreement on the incidence of congenital heart disease, with estimations varying from four per 1000 births to 50 per 1000 births, and it is not known how many patients with congenital heart disease have died. Based on several studies that estimated and calculated the number of adult patients with congenital heart disease, the number of patients should be much higher than the number of patients that are actually seen in specialized centres throughout Europe. This implies that either a large proportion of adult patients with congenital heart disease do not receive appropriate medical care, or that the calculations and estimations are grossly wrong. A combination of the two is also possible. A substantial expansion of the number and size of specialized centres for adult congenital heart disease is advocated, but since setting up (and running) a service for this disease is a costly affair, and because uncertainty remains about the actual number of patients needing specialized care, this has been difficult to realize in most European countries in the past few years.

Heart hospitals, medicare, and cross-subsidization.

BACKGROUND: Compared with heart hospitals (HHs), does Medicare provide better reimbursement to traditional hospitals (THs)? METHODS: Diagnosis Related Group (DRG)-specific data from Hospital Compare (www.hospitalcompare.hhs.gov) were used to compare Medicare reimbursement to hospitals in nine HH markets, representing 10% of the national HH market. RESULTS: On average, markets contained 1.2 HHs and 8.1 THs. Average market size for invasive cardiac services was $13+/-8.4 million, with HHs having 36.1% of the market share. Compared with HHs, THs received significantly better reimbursement for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG: $20,281+/-3,047 HH versus $23,958+/-4,562 TH; p=0.004), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI: $11,230+/-742 HH versus $13,347+/-2,662 TH; p<0.001), heart valve replacement ($33,710+/-4,056 HH versus $39,819+/-6,356 TH; p=0.001), pacemaker implantation ($11,245+/-706 HH versus $13,212+/-2,043 TH; p<0.001), heart failure ($5,622+/-489 HH versus $6,482+/-1,010 TH; p<0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD: $4,893+/-802 HH versus $5,641+/-841 TH; p=0.013), pneumonia ($5,708+/-763 HH versus $6,456+/-1,136 TH; p=0.012), and diabetes ($4,115+/-355 HH versus $4,963+/-812 TH; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The excessive reimbursement granted to THs for non-cardiac services is likely to reflect a policy decision to assist these hospitals with their cross-subsidization of other services. If Medicare is to cut reimbursement to TH for CABG, PCI, or other services, Medicare should be asked to pay more for the services (e.g. emergency room care) that it currently reimburses only indirectly through the process of cross-subsidization.

Development and first assessment of a questionnaire for health care utilization and costs for cardiac patients.

BACKGROUND: The valid and reliable measurement of health service utilization, productivity losses and consequently total disease-related costs is a prerequisite for health services research and for health economic analysis. Although administrative data sources are usually considered to be the most accurate, their use is limited as some components of utilization are not systematically captured and, especially in decentralized health care systems, no single source exists for comprehensive utilization and cost data. The aim of this study was to develop and test a questionnaire for the measurement of disease-related costs for patients after an acute cardiac event (ACE). METHODS: To design the questionnaire, the literature was searched for contributions to the assessment of utilization of health care resources by patient-administered questionnaires. Based on these findings, we developed a retrospective questionnaire appropriate for the measurement of disease-related costs over a period of 3 months in ACE patients. Items were generated by reviewing existing guidelines and by interviewing medical specialists and patients. In this study, the questionnaire was tested on 106 patients, aging 35-65 who were admitted for rehabilitation after ACE. It was compared with prospectively measured data; selected items were compared with administrative data from sickness funds. RESULTS: The questionnaire was accepted well (response rate = 88%), and respondents completed the questionnaire in an average time of 27 minutes. Concordance between retrospective and prospective data showed an intraclass correlation (ICC) ranging between 0.57 (cost of medical intake) and 0.9 (hospital days) with the other main items (physician visits, days off work, medication) clustering around 0.7. Comparison between self-reported and administrative data for days off work and hospitalized days were possible for n = 48. Respective ICCs ranged between 0.92 and 0.94, although differences in mean levels were observed. CONCLUSION: The questionnaire was accepted favorably and correlated well with alternative measurement approaches. This first assessment showed promising characteristics of this questionnaire in different aspects of validity for patients with ACE. However, additional research and more extensive tests in other patient groups would be worthwhile.

Specialty and full-service hospitals: a comparative cost analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of physician-owned cardiac, orthopedic, and surgical single specialty hospitals with those of full-service hospital competitors. DATA SOURCES: The primary data sources are the Medicare Cost Reports for 1998-2004 and hospital inpatient discharge data for three of the states where single specialty hospitals are most prevalent, Texas, California, and Arizona. The latter were obtained from the Texas Department of State Health Services, the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. Additional data comes from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database. STUDY DESIGN: We identified all physician-owned cardiac, orthopedic, and surgical specialty hospitals in these three states as well as all full-service acute care hospitals serving the same market areas, defined using Dartmouth Hospital Referral Regions. We estimated a hospital cost function using stochastic frontier regression analysis, and generated hospital specific inefficiency measures. Application of t-tests of significance compared the inefficiency measures of specialty hospitals with those of full-service hospitals to make general comparisons between these classes of hospitals. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Results do not provide evidence that specialty hospitals are more efficient than the full-service hospitals with whom they compete. In particular, orthopedic and surgical specialty hospitals appear to have significantly higher levels of cost inefficiency. Cardiac hospitals, however, do not appear to be different from competitors in this respect. CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers should not embrace the assumption that physician-owned specialty hospitals produce patient care more efficiently than their full-service hospital competitors.