Management of heart failure in cardiac amyloidosis using an ambulatory diuresis clinic.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent congestion in cardiac amyloidosis (CA) remains a management challenge, often requiring high dose diuretics and frequent hospitalizations. Innovative outpatient strategies are needed to effectively manage heart failure (HF) in patients with CA. Ambulatory diuresis has not been well studied in restrictive cardiomyopathy. Therefore, we aimed to examine the outcomes of an ambulatory diuresis clinic in the management of congestion related to CA. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively studied patients with CA seen in an outpatient HF disease management clinic for (1) safety outcomes of ambulatory intravenous (IV) diuresis and (2) health care utilization. Forty-four patients with CA were seen in the clinic a total of 203 times over 6 months. Oral diuretics were titrated at 96 (47%) visits. IV diuretics were administered at 56 (28%) visits to 17 patients. There were no episodes of severe acute kidney injury or symptomatic hypotension. There was a significant decrease in emergency department and inpatient visits and associated charges after index visit to the clinic. The proportion of days hospitalized per 1000 patient days of follow-up decreased as early as 30 days (147.3 vs 18.1/1000 patient days of follow-up, P< .001) and persisted through 180 days (33.6 vs 22.9/1000 patient days of follow-up, P< .001) pre- vs post-index visit to the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the feasibility of ambulatory IV diuresis in patients with CA. Our findings also suggest that use of a HF disease management clinic may reduce acute care utilization in patients with CA. Leveraging multidisciplinary outpatient HF clinics may be an effective alternative to hospitalization in patients with HF due to CA, a population who otherwise carries a poor prognosis and contributes to high health care burden.

Improving Outcomes After Hospitalization: A Prospective Observational Multicenter Evaluation of Care Coordination Strategies for Reducing 30-Day Readmissions to Maryland Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Patients frequently experience suboptimal transitions from the hospital to the community, which can increase the likelihood of readmission. It is not known which care coordination services can lead to improvements in readmission rates. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of two care coordination interventions on 30-day readmission rates. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter observational study of hospitalized patients eligible for two care coordination services between January 1, 2013, and October 31, 2015. Readmission rates were compared for patients who received each care coordination intervention versus those who did not using multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regression models. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 25,628 patients hospitalized in medicine, neurosciences, or surgical sciences units. INTERVENTIONS: Patients discharged home and deemed to be at high risk for readmission were assigned a nurse Transition Guide (TG) for 30 days post-discharge. All other patients were assigned the Patient Access Line (PAL) intervention, which provided a post-discharge phone call from a registered nurse. SETTING: Two large academic hospitals in Baltimore, MD. MAIN MEASURES: Thirty-day all-cause readmission to any Maryland hospital. KEY RESULTS: Among all patients, 14.2% (2409/16,993) of those referred for the PAL intervention and 22.8% (1973/8635) of those referred for the TG intervention were readmitted. PAL-referred patients who did not receive the intervention had an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for readmission of 1.27 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.12-1.44, p < 0.001) compared with patients who did. TG-referred patients who did not receive the TG intervention had an aOR of 1.83 (95% CI 1.60-2.10, p < 0.001) compared with patients who received the intervention. Younger age, male sex, having more comorbidities, and being discharged from a medicine unit were associated with not receiving an assigned intervention. These characteristics were also associated with higher readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: PAL and TG care coordination interventions were associated with lower rates of 30-day readmission. Our findings underscore the importance of determining the appropriate intervention for the hardest-to-reach patients, who are also at the highest risk of being readmitted.

Patterns of Hospital Performance on the Hospital-Wide 30-Day Readmission Metric: Is the Playing Field Level?

BACKGROUND: Hospital performance on the 30-day hospital-wide readmission (HWR) metric as calculated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is currently reported as a quality measure. Focusing on patient-level factors may provide an incomplete picture of readmission risk at the hospital level to explain variations in hospital readmission rates. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and quantify hospital-level characteristics that track with hospital performance on the current HWR metric. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING/PATIENTS: A total of 4785 US hospitals. METRICS: We linked publically available data on individual hospitals published by CMS on patient-level adjusted 30-day HWR rates from July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2014, to the 2014 American Hospital Association annual survey. Primary outcome was performance in the worst CMS-calculated HWR quartile. Primary hospital-level exposure variables were defined as: size (total number of beds), safety net status (top quartile of disproportionate share), academic status [member of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)], National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCI-CCC) status, and hospital services offered (e.g., transplant, hospice, emergency department). Multilevel regression was used to evaluate the association between 30-day HWR and the hospital-level factors. RESULTS: Hospital-level characteristics significantly associated with performing in the worst CMS-calculated HWR quartile included: safety net status [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.61-2.45, p < 0.001], large size (> 400 beds, aOR 1.42, 95% CI 1.07-1.90, p = 0.016), AAMC alone status (aOR 1.95, 95% CI 1.35-2.83, p < 0.001), and AAMC plus NCI-CCC status (aOR 5.16, 95% CI 2.58-10.31, p < 0.001). Hospitals with more critical care beds (aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.02-1.56, p = 0.033), those with transplant services (aOR 2.80, 95% CI 1.48-5.31,p = 0.001), and those with emergency room services (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 1.12-10.15, p = 0.031) demonstrated significantly worse HWR performance. Hospice service (aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.82, p < 0.001) and having a higher proportion of total discharges being surgical cases (aOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50-0.76, p < 0.001) were associated with better performance. LIMITATION: The study approach was not intended to be an alternate readmission metric to compete with the existing CMS metric, which would require a re-examination of patient-level data combined with hospital-level data. CONCLUSION: A number of hospital-level characteristics (such as academic tertiary care center status) were significantly associated with worse performance on the CMS-calculated HWR metric, which may have important health policy implications. Until the reasons for readmission variability can be addressed, reporting the current HWR metric as an indicator of hospital quality should be reevaluated.

The Paradox of Readmission Prevention Interventions: Missing Those Most in Need.

BACKGROUND: Post-hospitalization transition interventions remain a priority in preventing rehospitalization. However, not all patients referred for readmission prevention interventions receive them. We sought to 1) define patient characteristics associated with non-receipt of readmission prevention interventions (among those eligible for them), and 2) determine whether these same patient characteristics are associated with hospital readmission at the state level. METHODS: We used state-wide data from the Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission to determine patient-level factors associated with state-wide readmissions. Concurrently, we conducted a retrospective analysis of discharged patients referred to receive 1 of 3 post-discharge interventions between January 2013 and July 2019-a nurse transition guide, post-discharge phone call, or follow-up appointment in our post-discharge clinic-to determine patient-level factors associated with not receiving the intervention. Multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regression models were used to calculate the odds of not accepting or not receiving the interventions. RESULTS: Older age, male gender, black race, higher expected readmission rate, and lower socioeconomic status were significantly associated with 30-day readmission in hospitalized Maryland patients. Most of these variables (age, sex, race, payer type [Medicaid or non-Medicaid], and socioeconomic status) were also associated with non-receipt of intervention. CONCLUSIONS: We found that many of the same patient-level characteristics associated with the highest readmission risk are also associated with non-receipt of readmission reduction interventions. This highlights the paradox that patients at high risk of readmission are least likely to accept or receive interventions for preventing readmission. Identifying strategies to engage hard-to-reach high-risk patients continues to be an unmet challenge in readmission prevention.

C4d deposition without rejection correlates with reduced early scarring in ABO-incompatible renal allografts.

C4d deposition in peritubular capillaries is a specific marker for the presence of antidonor antibodies in renal transplant recipients and is usually associated with antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in conventional allografts. In ABO-incompatible grafts, however, peritubular capillary C4d is often present on protocol biopsies lacking histologic features of AMR; the significance of C4d in this setting remains unclear. For addressing this, data from 33 patients who received ABO-incompatible renal allografts (after desensitization) were retrospectively reviewed. Protocol biopsies were performed at 1 and/or 3 and 6 mo after transplantation in each recipient and at 12 mo in 28 recipients. Twenty-one patients (group A) had strong, diffuse peritubular capillary C4d staining without histologic evidence of AMR or cellular rejection on their initial protocol biopsies. The remaining 12 patients (group B) had negative or weak, focal peritubular capillary C4d staining. Three grafts (two in group B) were lost but not as a result of AMR. Excluding these three patients, serum creatinine levels were similar in the two groups at 6 and 12 mo after transplantation and at last follow-up; however, recipients in group A developed significantly fewer overall chronic changes, as scored by the sum of Banff chronic indices, than group B during the first year after transplantation. These results suggest that diffuse peritubular capillary C4d deposition without rejection is associated with a lower risk for scarring in ABO-incompatible renal allografts; the generalizability of these results to conventional allografts remains unknown.

Association of a Care Coordination Model With Health Care Costs and Utilization: The Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP).

Importance: The Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership was created to improve care coordination across the continuum in East Baltimore, Maryland. Objective: To determine whether the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP) was associated with improved outcomes and lower spending. Design, Setting, and Participants: Nonrandomized acute care intervention (ACI) and community intervention (CI) Medicare and Medicaid participants were analyzed in a quality improvement study using difference-in-differences designs with propensity score-weighted and matched comparison groups. The study spanned 2012 to 2016 and took place in acute care hospitals, primary care clinics, skilled nursing facilities, and community-based organizations. The ACI analysis compared outcomes of participants in Medicare and Medicaid during their 90-day postacute episode with those of a propensity score-weighted preintervention group at Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership hospitals and a concurrent comparison group drawn from similar Maryland hospitals. The CI analysis compared changes in outcomes of Medicare and Medicaid participants with those of a propensity score-matched comparison group of local residents. Interventions: The ACI bundle aimed to improve transition planning following discharge. The CI included enhanced care coordination and integrated behavioral support from local primary care sites in collaboration with community-based organizations. Main Outcomes and Measures: Utilization measures of hospital admissions, 30-day readmissions, and emergency department visits; quality of care measures of potentially avoidable hospitalizations, practitioner follow-up visits; and total cost of care (TCOC) for Medicare and Medicaid participants. Results: The CI group had 2154 Medicare beneficiaries (1320 [61.3%] female; mean age, 69.3 years) and 2532 Medicaid beneficiaries (1483 [67.3%] female; mean age, 55.1 years). For the CI group's Medicaid participants, aggregate TCOC reduction was $24.4 million, and reductions of hospitalizations, emergency department visits, 30-day readmissions, and avoidable hospitalizations were 33, 51, 36, and 7 per 1000 beneficiaries, respectively. The ACI group had 26 144 beneficiary-episodes for Medicare (13 726 [52.5%] female patients; mean patient age, 68.4 years) and 13 921 beneficiary-episodes for Medicaid (7392 [53.1%] female patients; mean patient age, 52.2 years). For the ACI group's Medicare participants, there was a significant reduction in aggregate TCOC of $29.2 million with increases in 90-day hospitalizations and 30-day readmissions of 11 and 14 per 1000 beneficiary-episodes, respectively, and reduction in practitioner follow-up visits of 41 and 29 per 1000 beneficiary-episodes for 7-day and 30-day visits, respectively. For the ACI group's Medicaid participants, there was a significant reduction in aggregate TCOC of $59.8 million and the 90-day emergency department visit rate decreased by 133 per 1000 episodes, but hospitalizations increased by 49 per 1000 episodes and practitioner follow-up visits decreased by 70 and 182 per 1000 episodes for 7-day and 30-day visits, respectively. In total, the CI and ACI were associated with $113.3 million in cost savings. Conclusions and Relevance: A care coordination model consisting of complementary bundled interventions in an urban academic environment was associated with lower spending and improved health outcomes.