Prevalence of homelessness among hospitalized patients: A point-in-time survey.

Although homelessness is associated with increased acute healthcare utilization and poorer health outcomes, the prevalence of homelessness and housing insecurity in hospitalized patients is poorly characterized. We conducted an in-person survey to determine the prevalence of housing insecurity and homelessness among hospitalized patients at two hospitals in metropolitan Denver in conjunction with the Housing and Urban Development point-in-time count on January 24, 2022. Of the 271 surveyed patients, 79 (29.2%) reported experiencing either housing insecurity (17.3%) or homelessness (11.8%). Of those experiencing housing insecurity or homelessness, 69.6% reported chronic health conditions, 55.7% reported multiple hospitalizations in the preceding year, 38% reported mental health concerns and 39.2% reported substance use. The prevalence of homelessness among a hospitalized patient population was over 20-fold higher than community prevalence estimates. Housing insecurity also impacted a substantial proportion of hospitalized patients and was associated with high rates of co-morbid conditions.

Lessons Learned through Implementing SARS-CoV-2 Testing and Isolation for People Experiencing Homelessness in Congregate Shelters.

BACKGROUND: The Denver COVID-19 Joint Task Force is a multisector community partnership which formed to coordinate Denver's pandemic response in people experiencing homelessness (PEH). OBJECTIVES: Describe how interdisciplinary community partners collaborated to develop, implement, and pilot severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing and isolation protocols in congregate shelters, and discuss lessons learned and subsequently applied. METHODS: In March through May 2020, community partners collaborated to design, implement and conduct pilot testing paired with isolation in a subset of PEH at a congregate shelter to assess feasibility and inform protocol development.Results and Lessons Learned: We performed SARS-CoV-2 testing in 52 PEH with 14 (27%) testing positive or inconclusive. Thirteen (93%) positive or inconclusive participants were transferred to isolation hotels with 9 of 13 (69%) transferred within 72 hours of testing. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings informed development of coronavirus disease 2019 surveillance testing and isolation protocols for PEH and highlight the value of community partnerships in nimbly responding to the pandemic.

Perspectives of Latinx Individuals Who Were Unvaccinated And Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: Latinx individuals in the United States have lower COVID-19 vaccination rates and higher rates of COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths than non-Latinx White individuals. Little is known about the perspectives of Latinx adults who had not received the COVID-19 vaccination and were hospitalized for COVID-19. Objective: To describe the perspectives of Latinx individuals who were unvaccinated and subsequently hospitalized for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study was conducted using semistructured phone interviews with 25 Latinx adults who were unvaccinated and survived a COVID-19 hospitalization in a public safety net hospital in Colorado from February to November 2021. Interviews were audio recorded, and transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Themes and subthemes of perspectives on vaccination. Results: Among 25 adults (14 [56.0%] women, 11 [44.0%] men; mean [SD] age, 51 [15] years) who participated, all participants self-identified as Latino, Latina, or Latinx or Hispanic. There were 11 individuals who relied on emergency Medicaid (hospital coverage for Denver residents who are undocumented), while 10 individuals (40.0%) were essential workers and 13 individuals (52.0%) were unemployed. In interviews, 3 themes (with subthemes) were identified: factors associated with vaccination after hospitalization (subthemes: fear of death, avoiding hospitalization and reinfection, convinced COVID-19 is real, and responded to pressure from others), concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine (subthemes: experimental status and short timeline for production, contents of vaccine unknown or concerning, vaccine considered ineffective, worrisome immediate and long-term adverse effects, mixed and conflicting information, and government aimed to control or mark population through vaccination), and opportunities to improve vaccine uptake (subthemes; sharing personal experiences through social media, testimonials about minimal vaccine adverse effects, connecting with friends and family about the hospitalization experience, making the vaccine more accessible, and connecting with trusted sources of information). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that Latinx individuals who were unvaccinated and subsequently hospitalized for COVID-19 were motivated to engage in advocacy to encourage vaccination in their communities. These findings suggest that supporting patient advocacy after hospital discharge and continued efforts to create low-barrier, patient-informed public health strategies may be associated with increased vaccine uptake in Latinx communities.

Lower Prevalence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection Among People Experiencing Homelessness Tested in Outdoor Encampments Compared With Overnight Shelters: Denver, Colorado, June-July 2020.

BACKGROUND: A better understanding of the risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that people experiencing homelessness (PEH) face in congregate shelters versus unsheltered encampments is critical for an effective pandemic response. METHODS: We analyzed factors associated with current and past severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among PEH in day and overnight shelters and encampments in Denver, Colorado, during June 2-July 28, 2020, and constructed multivariable logistic regression models to examine risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and seropositivity with age, race/ethnicity, testing location, testing month, and symptom status as predictor variables. RESULTS: A total of 823 participants were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and 276 individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. A greater percentage of PEH at overnight shelters tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (8.6% vs 2.5%, P < .01) and antibodies (21.5% vs 8.7%, P = .03) compared with encampments. In regression models, testing at an overnight shelter compared with testing at encampments (odds ratio [OR] = 3.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-9.02) had increased odds of a positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA result. Age >60 years compared with age <40 years (OR = 5.92; 95% CI: 1.83-20.3), Hispanic ethnicity (OR = 3.43; 95% CI: 1.36-8.95), and non-Hispanic Black race compared with non-Hispanic White race (OR = 3.07; 95% CI: 1.16-8.26), and testing at an overnight shelter compared to testing at encampments (OR = 2.45; 95% CI: 1.04-6.17) had increased odds of a positive antibody result. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the need for continuing assessment of mitigation strategies in shelters, increasing access to individual rooms and linkage to housing options for PEH, and supporting people to remain in encampments when these options are not available.

What Do Patients Want? A Qualitative Analysis of Patient, Provider, and Administrative Perceptions and Expectations About Patients' Hospital Stays.

Patient experience is increasingly recognized as a measure of health care quality and patient-centered care and is currently measured through the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS). The HCAHPS survey may miss key factors important to patients, and in particular, to underserved patient populations. We performed a qualitative study utilizing semi-structured interviews with 45 hospitalized English- and Spanish-speaking patients and 6 focus groups with physicians, nurses, and administrators at a large, urban safety-net hospital. Four main themes were important to patients: (1) the hospital environment including cleanliness and how hospital policies and procedures impact patients' perceived autonomy, (2) whole-person care, (3) communication with and between care teams and utilizing words that patients can understand, and (4) responsiveness and attentiveness to needs. We found that several key themes that were important to patients are not fully addressed in the HCAHPS survey and there is a disconnect between what patients and care teams believe patients want and what hospital policies drive in the care environment.

The effect of eye images and a social norms message on healthcare provider hand hygiene adherence.

BACKGROUND: Depictions of eye images and messages encouraging compliance with social norms have successfully motivated behavioral change in a variety of experimental and applied settings. We studied the effect of these 2 visual cues on hand hygiene adherence in a cohort of hospital-based healthcare providers participating in an electronic monitoring and feedback program. METHODS: Prospective, quasi-experimental study utilizing an interrupted time-series design. Intervention placards depicting an image of eyes, a social norms message, or a control placard were placed near soap and alcohol-based hand-rub dispensers on 2 hospital units. Placards were alternated every 10 days. Hand hygiene opportunities and adherence rates were assessed electronically via the CenTrak Hand Hygiene Compliance Solution. RESULTS: A total of 166 nurses and certified nursing assistants (74 on a medical-surgical unit and 92 on a progressive care unit) were monitored electronically over the 4-month study period. In total, 184,172 electronic observations were collected (110,903 on a medical-surgical unit and 73,269 on a progressive care unit). The median daily number of electronic observations was 1,471 (interquartile range, 1,337-1,584). The preintervention baseline hand hygiene adherence rate was 70%. No statistically significant increase in hand hygiene adherence was observed as a result of either intervention. CONCLUSION: Displaying eye images or a social norms message in the hospital environment did not result in measurable improvements in HH adherence in a cohort of healthcare providers participating in an electronic monitoring and feedback program.

Barriers to Early Hospital Discharge: A Cross-Sectional Study at Five Academic Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the issues delaying hospital discharges may inform efforts to improve hospital throughput. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to identify and determine the frequency of barriers contributing to delays in placing discharge orders. DESIGN: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study. Physicians were surveyed at approximately 8:00 AM, 12:00 PM, and 3:00 PM and were asked to identify patients that were "definite" or "possible" discharges and to describe the specific barriers to writing discharge orders. SETTING: This study was conducted at five hospitals in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: The study participants were attending and housestaff physicians on general medicine services. PRIMARY OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Specific barriers to writing discharge orders were the primary outcomes; the secondary outcomes included discharge order time for high versus low team census, teaching versus nonteaching services, and rounding style. RESULTS: Among 1,584 patient evaluations, the most common delays for patients identified as "definite" discharges (n = 949) were related to caring for other patients on the team or waiting to staff patients with attendings. The most common barriers for patients identified as "possible" discharges (n = 1,237) were awaiting patient improvement and for ancillary services to complete care. Discharge orders were written a median of 43-58 minutes earlier for patients on teams with a smaller versus larger census, on nonteaching versus teaching services, and when rounding on patients likely to be discharged first (all P < .003). CONCLUSIONS: Discharge orders for patients ready for discharge are most commonly delayed because physicians are caring for other patients. Discharges of patients awaiting care completion are most commonly delayed because of imbalances between availability and demand for ancillary services. Team census, rounding style, and teaching teams affect discharge times.

Effects of a Syndrome-Specific Antibiotic Stewardship Intervention for Inpatient Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

Background. Syndrome-specific interventions are a recommended approach to antibiotic stewardship, but additional data are needed to understand their potential impact. We implemented an intervention to improve the management of inpatient community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and evaluated its effects on antibiotic and resource utilization. Methods. A stakeholder group developed and implemented a clinical practice guideline and order set for inpatient, non-intensive care unit CAP recommending a short course (5 days) of a fluoroquinolone-sparing antibiotic regimen in uncomplicated cases. Unless there was suspicion for complications or resistant pathogens, chest computed tomography (CT) and sputum cultures were discouraged. This was a retrospective preintervention postintervention study of patients hospitalized for CAP before (April 15, 2008-May 31, 2009) and after (July 1, 2011-July 31, 2012) implementation of the guideline. The primary comparison was the difference in duration of therapy during the baseline and intervention periods. Secondary outcomes included changes in use of levofloxacin, CT scans, and sputum culture. Results. One hundred sixty-six and 84 cases during the baseline and intervention periods, respectively, were included. From the baseline to intervention period, the median duration of therapy decreased from 10 to 7 days (P < .0001). Prescription of levofloxacin at discharge decreased from 60% to 27% of cases (P < .0001). Use of chest CT and sputum culture decreased from 47% to 32% of cases (P = .02) and 51% to 31% of cases (P = .03), respectively. The frequency of clinical failure between the 2 periods was similar. Conclusions. A syndrome-specific intervention for inpatient CAP was associated with shorter treatment durations and reductions in use of fluoroquinolones and low-yield diagnostic tests.

Postdischarge telephone calls by hospitalists as a transitional care strategy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether treating hospitalists can identify and address early postdischarge problems through a structured telephone call. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: We studied patients insured through a managed care program who were discharged from a general internal medicine service of a university-affiliated public safety net hospital (Denver Health Medical Center) between March 1, 2012, and October 31, 2013. The hospitalist who treated the patient during their hospitalization contacted them 48 to 72 hours after discharge and completed a structured telephone assessment. We assessed the type and frequency of problems identified, the proportion of calls in which problems were independently addressed by the hospitalist, the proportion referred for additional managed care services, and the duration of calls and subsequent care coordination. RESULTS: Treating hospitalists identified 1 or more problems in 74 of the 131 patients (56%) contacted. The most common categories of problems were: new or worsening symptoms (41%), difficulty accessing recommended follow-up care (21%), and medication issues (20%). Hospitalists independently managed the problems identified in 68% of the calls; additional services were required in 32%. Median time spent per call was 8 minutes (interquartile range, 5-12). CONCLUSIONS: Treating hospitalists identified problems in over half of patients contacted by telephone shortly after discharge, the largest proportion of which were new or worsening symptoms. Hospitalists were able to address the majority of problems identified through the single, brief telephone encounter without utilizing additional resources.

Postdischarge problems identified by telephone calls to an advice line.

BACKGROUND: Problems experienced after hospital discharge can result in rehospitalizations and unscheduled urgent and emergent care. OBJECTIVE: To identify opportunities for improving discharge processes by examining calls to an advice line (AL). DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: A 500-bed, university-affiliated hospital. PATIENTS: Patients who called an AL between September 1, 2011 and September 1, 2012 and reported being hospitalized within 30 days. INTERVENTION: None MEASUREMENTS: Caller characteristics, timing of calls, nature of reported problems. RESULTS: Over 1 year the AL received calls from 308 unique patients who were hospitalized or had outpatient surgery within 30 days preceding the call. Thirty-one percent and 47% of calls occurred within 24 or 48 hours of discharge, respectively. Sixty-three percent came from surgery patients despite surgery patients accounting for only 38% of the discharges. The most common issues were uncontrolled pain, questions about medications, and aftercare instructions (eg, the care of surgical wounds). The rates of 30-day readmissions and urgent or emergent care visits were higher for patients who called the AL than for those who did not (15% vs 4% and 30% vs 7%, respectively, both P < 0.0001), but sample sizes were too small to accommodate robust matching or multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Problems described in calls by patients to an AL identified several aspects of our discharge processes that needed improvement. Patients calling an AL following discharge may be at increased risk for 30-day rehospitalization and urgent or emergent care visits.

Prospective comparison of curbside versus formal consultations.

BACKGROUND: Curbside consultations are commonly requested during the care of hospitalized patients, but physicians perceive that the recommendations provided may be based on inaccurate or incomplete information. OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy and completeness of the information received from providers requesting a curbside consultation of hospitalists with that obtained in a formal consultation on the same patients, and to examine whether the recommendations offered in the 2 consultations differed. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: University-affiliated, urban safety net hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of curbside consultations with inaccurate or incomplete information; frequency with which recommendations in the formal consultation differed from those in the curbside consultation. RESULTS: Curbside consultations were requested for 50 patients, 47 of which were also evaluated in a formal consultation performed on the same day by a hospitalist other than the one performing the curbside consultation. Based on information collected in the formal consultation, information was either inaccurate or incomplete in 24/47 (51%) of the curbside consultations. Management advice after formal consultation differed from that given in the curbside consultation for 28/47 patients (60%). When inaccurate or incomplete information was received, the advice provided in the formal versus the curbside consultation differed in 22/24 patients (92%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Information presented during inpatient curbside consultations of hospitalists is often inaccurate or incomplete, and this often results in inaccurate management advice.