Telemedicine for Children With Medical Complexity: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is widely used but has uncertain value. We assessed telemedicine to further improve outcomes and reduce costs of comprehensive care (CC) for medically complex children. METHODS: We conducted a single-center randomized clinical trial comparing telemedicine with CC relative to CC alone for medically complex children in reducing care days outside the home (clinic, emergency department, or hospital; primary outcome), rate of children developing serious illnesses (causing death, ICU admission, or hospital stay >7 days), and health system costs. We used intent-to-treat Bayesian analyses with neutral prior assuming no benefit. All participants received CC, which included 24/7 phone access to primary care providers (PCPs), low patient-to-PCP ratio, and hospital consultation from PCPs. The telemedicine group also received remote audiovisual communication with the PCPs. RESULTS: Between August 22, 2018, and March 23, 2020, we randomly assigned 422 medically complex children (209 to CC with telemedicine and 213 to CC alone) before meeting predefined stopping rules. The probability of a reduction with CC with telemedicine versus CC alone was 99% for care days outside the home (12.94 vs 16.94 per child-year; Bayesian rate ratio, 0.80 [95% credible interval, 0.66-0.98]), 95% for rate of children with a serious illness (0.29 vs 0.62 per child-year; rate ratio, 0.68 [0.43-1.07]) and 91% for mean total health system costs (US$33 718 vs US$41 281 per child-year; Bayesian cost ratio, 0.85 [0.67-1.08]). CONCLUSION: The addition of telemedicine to CC likely reduced care days outside the home, serious illnesses, other adverse outcomes, and health care costs for medically complex children.

Unexpected results of a randomized quality improvement program for children with severe asthma.

Objective: To assess whether an asthma intervention program reduces treatment days outside the home among children with severe asthma receiving comprehensive care (CC) in our center.Methods: Between October 21, 2014 and September 28, 2016, children with severe asthma were randomized to receive CC alone (n = 29) or CC plus the asthma intervention program (n = 34) which involved collaboration with pharmacists and school nurses, motivational interviewing, and tracking the one-second forced expiratory volume at home. All patients were followed through March 31, 2017. Frequentist and Bayesian intent-to-treat analyses were performed.Results: The asthma intervention program doubled the telephone calls between the staff and families (753 vs 356 per 100 child years for the intervention group vs. control group; Rate Ratio [RR], 2.11 [95% confidence interval, 1.29-3.45]). Yet, we found no evidence that it reduced the composite number of days of healthcare outside home which includes: clinic visits, ED visits, and hospital admissions (1179 vs 958 per 100 child-years in the intervention group vs. control group; [RR], 1.23 [95% CI, 0.82-1.84]) or secondary outcomes which are individual components (clinic visits, ED visits, hospitalizations, PICU admissions and school absences; RR 1.15 - 2.30; p > 0.05). Bayesian analysis indicated a 67% probability that the intervention program increases total treatment days outside the home and only a 14% probability of a true decrease of >20% as originally hypothesized.Conclusion: A multi-component intervention program provided to children with severe asthma failed to reduce and may have increased days of healthcare outside home and school absenteeism.

Hospital Consultation From Outpatient Clinicians for Medically Complex Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Children with medical complexity (CMC) frequently experience fragmented care. We have demonstrated that outpatient comprehensive care (CC) reduces serious illnesses, hospitalizations, and costs for high-risk CMC. Yet continuity of care for CMC is often disrupted with emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Objective: To evaluate a hospital consultation (HC) service for CMC from their outpatient CC clinicians. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized quality improvement trial at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston with an outpatient CC clinic and tertiary pediatric hospital (Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital). Participants included high-risk CMC (≥2 hospitalizations or ≥1 pediatric intensive care unit [PICU] admission in the year before enrolling in our clinic) receiving CC. Data were analyzed between January 11, 2018, and December 20, 2019. Interventions: The HC included serial discussions between CC clinicians, ED physicians, and hospitalists addressing need for admission, inpatient treatment, and transition back to outpatient care. Usual hospital care (UHC) involved routine pediatric hospitalist care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total hospital days (primary outcome), PICU days, hospitalizations, and health system costs in skeptical bayesian analyses (using a prior probability assuming no benefit). Results: From October 3, 2016, through October 2, 2017, 342 CMC were randomized to either HC (n = 167) or UHC (n = 175) before meeting the predefined bayesian stopping guideline (>80% probability of reduced hospital days). In intention-to-treat analyses, the probability that HC reduced total hospital days was 91% (2.72 vs 6.01 per child-year; bayesian rate ratio [RR], 0.61; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.30-1.26). The probability of a reduction with HC vs UHC was 98% for hospitalizations (0.60 vs 0.93 per child-year; RR, 0.68; 95% CrI, 0.48-0.97), 89% for PICU days (0.77 vs 1.89 per child-year; RR, 0.59; 95% CrI, 0.26-1.38), and 94% for mean total health system costs ($24 928 vs $42 276 per child-year; cost ratio, 0.67; 95% CrI, 0.41-1.10). In secondary analysis using a bayesian prior centered at RR of 0.78, reflecting the opinion of 7 experts knowledgeable about CMC, the probability that HC reduced hospital days was 96%. Conclusions and Relevance: Among CMC receiving comprehensive outpatient care, an HC service from outpatient clinicians likely reduced total hospital days, hospitalizations, PICU days, other outcomes, and health system costs. Additional trials of an HC service from outpatient CC clinicians are needed for CMC in other centers. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02870387.

Dual use of bronchodilators versus monotherapy, and its impact on pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD patients.

INTRODUCTION: Long-acting bronchodilators are the therapy with the best evidence for treating stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Long-acting combinations of ß2 agonists and anticholinergics (LABA-LAMA) are recommended in advanced stages when monotherapy has not generated the desired effects. Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) is an effective non-pharmacological strategy. The aim of this study was to compare the results obtained in patients with COPD who received monotherapy versus dual bronchodilator therapy in terms of functional aerobic capacity, symptoms and quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective non randomized intervention study; the patients were divided into two groups: in one group patients were treated with LAMA (Tiotropium Bromide, 5 µg every 24 h) and in the other group patients were treated with LABA + LAMA (Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium, 110/50 µg once a day). After receiving the concept of pulmonology, patients were intervened with 8 weeks of PR. The study was approved by the committee of the Clinica Neumológica del Pacifico in Cali and the Institución Universitaria Escuela Nacional del Deporte, Colombia. To determine the differences, t pair test for intragroup, and t-test was performed for intergroup analysis. For all tests, a p-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. RESULTS: 53 patients participated in this study, of which 20 were assigned to the LAMA group and 33 to the LAMA + LABA group. Patients in both groups presented changes in the distance of the 6MWT, in the VO2e, dyspnea and in all the SGRQ domains. Regarding the comparison between groups, there were found no differences in the variables at the beginning of the PR and significant differences (p < 0.05) at the end of the 8 week-period in favor of the LABA + LAMA group, in symptoms with the mMRC scale, functional aerobic capacity with the 6 min walking test and in health related quality of life specifically in the symptoms domain, where the dual therapy group obtained better results. CONCLUSION: The addition of LABA to the treatment with LAMA showed better response results compared with the monotherapy in patients with COPD who attended PR.

Post-Trial Sustainability and Scalability of the Benefits of a Medical Home for High-Risk Children with Medical Complexity.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the sustainability of the benefits relative to usual care of a medical home providing comprehensive care for high-risk children with medical complexity (≥2 hospitalizations or ≥1 pediatric intensive care unit [PICU] admission in the year before enrollment) after we made comprehensive care our standard practice and expanded the program. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted pre-post comparisons of the rate of children with serious illness (death, PICU admission, or >7-day hospitalization) and health-system costs observed after program expansion (March 2014-June 2015) to those during the clinical trial (March 2011-August 2013) for each of the trial's treatment groups (usual care, n = 96, and comprehensive care, n = 105; primary analyses), and among all children given comprehensive care (nPost-trial = 233, including trial usual care children who transitioned to comprehensive care post-trial and newly enrolled medically complex children, and nTrial = 105; secondary analyses). We also analyzed the findings for the trial patients as a 2-phase stepped-wedge study. RESULTS: In intent-to-treat analyses, rates of children with serious illness and costs were reduced or unchanged post-trial vs trial for the trial's usual care group (rate ratio [RR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20-0.64; cost ratio [CR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.28-1.68), the trial's comprehensive care group (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.39-1.41; CR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51-0.89), and among all children given comprehensive care (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.61-1.52; CR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.93). Conservative stepped-wedge analyses identified overall benefits with comprehensive care across both study periods (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.72; CR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Major benefits of comprehensive care did not diminish with post-trial program expansion.

The Effect of Comprehensive Medical Care on the Long-Term Outcomes of Children Discharged from the NICU with Tracheostomy.

BACKGROUND: Survival of infants with complex care has led to a growing population of technology-dependent children. Medical technology introduces additional complexity to patient care. Outcomes after NICU discharge comparing Usual Care (UC) with Comprehensive Care (CC) remain elusive. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of technology-dependent infants discharged from NICU with tracheostomy following UC versus CC. METHODS: A single site retrospective study evaluated forty-three (N=43) technology-dependent infants discharged from NICU with tracheostomy over 5½ years (2011-2017). CC provided 24-hour accessible healthcare-providers using an enhanced medical home. Mortality, total hospital admissions, 30-days readmission rate, time-to-mechanical ventilation liberation, and time-to-decannulation were compared between groups. RESULTS: CC group showed significantly lower mortality (3.4%) versus UC (35.7%), RR, 0.09 [95%CI, 0.12-0.75], P=0.025. CC reduced total hospital admissions to 78 per 100 child-years versus 162 for UC; RR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.25-0.93], P=0.03. The 30-day readmission rate was 21% compared to 36% in UC; RR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.21-1.58], P=0.29). In competing-risk regression analysis (treating death as a competing-risk), hazard of having mechanical ventilation removal in CC was two times higher than UC; SHR, 2.19 [95% CI, 0.70-6.84]. There was no difference in time-to-decannulation between groups; SHR, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.37-3.15]. CONCLUSION: CC significantly decreased mortality, total number of hospital admissions and length of time-to-mechanical ventilation liberation.

Effect of an enhanced medical home on serious illness and cost of care among high-risk children with chronic illness: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Patient-centered medical homes have not been shown to reduce adverse outcomes or costs in adults or children with chronic illness. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether an enhanced medical home providing comprehensive care prevents serious illness (death, intensive care unit [ICU] admission, or hospital stay >7 days) and/or reduces costs among children with chronic illness. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trial of high-risk children with chronic illness (≥3 emergency department visits, ≥2 hospitalizations, or ≥1 pediatric ICU admissions during previous year, and >50% estimated risk for hospitalization) treated at a high-risk clinic at the University of Texas, Houston, and randomized to comprehensive care (n = 105) or usual care (n = 96). Enrollment was between March 2011 and February 2013 (when predefined stopping rules for benefit were met) and outcome evaluations continued through August 31, 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Comprehensive care included treatment from primary care clinicians and specialists in the same clinic with multiple features to promote prompt effective care. Usual care was provided locally in private offices or faculty-supervised clinics without modification. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome: children with a serious illness (death, ICU admission, or hospital stay >7 days), costs (health system perspective). Secondary outcomes: individual serious illnesses, medical services, Medicaid payments, and medical school revenues and costs. RESULTS: In an intent-to-treat analysis, comprehensive care decreased both the rate of children with a serious illness (10 per 100 child-years vs 22 for usual care; rate ratio [RR], 0.45 [95% CI, 0.28-0.73]), and total hospital and clinic costs ($16,523 vs $26,781 per child-year, respectively; cost ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.38-0.88]). In analyses of net monetary benefit, the probability that comprehensive care was cost neutral or cost saving was 97%. Comprehensive care reduced (per 100 child-years) serious illnesses (16 vs 44 for usual care; RR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.17-0.66]), emergency department visits (90 vs 190; RR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.34-0.67]), hospitalizations (69 vs 131; RR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.33-0.77]), pediatric ICU admissions (9 vs 26; RR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.18-0.70]), and number of days in a hospital (276 vs 635; RR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.19-0.67]). Medicaid payments were reduced by $6243 (95% CI, $1302-$11,678) per child-year. Medical school losses (costs minus revenues) increased by $6018 (95% CI, $5506-$6629) per child-year. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among high-risk children with chronic illness, an enhanced medical home that provided comprehensive care to promote prompt effective care vs usual care reduced serious illnesses and costs. These findings from a single site of selected patients with a limited number of clinicians require study in larger, broader populations before conclusions about generalizability to other settings can be reached. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02128776.

Airway obstruction in congenital central hypoventilation syndrome.

Congenital central hypoventilation syndrome (CCHS) is the failure of the autonomic system to control adequate ventilation while asleep with preserved ventilatory response while awake. We report a case of a patient with CCHS who presented with intrathoracic and extrathoracic airway obstruction after tracheostomy tube decannulation and phrenic nerve pacer placement. Nocturnal polysomnography (NPSG) revealed hypoxia, hypercapnia and obstructive sleep apnoea, which required bilevel positive airway pressure titration. Airway endoscopy demonstrated tracheomalacia and paretic true vocal cords in the paramedian position during diaphragmatic pacing. Laryngeal electromyography demonstrated muscular electrical impulses that correlated with diaphragmatic pacer settings. Thus, we surmise that the patient's upper and lower airway obstruction was secondary to diaphragmatic pacer activity. Thorough airway evaluation, including NPSG and endoscopy, may help identify the side effects of diaphragmatic pacing, such as airway obstruction, in patients with CCHS.