Financial Incentives to Enhance Participation of Resident Physicians in Hospital-Based Quality Improvement Projects.

BACKGROUND: Methods to promote successful trainee participation in quality improvement projects are poorly studied. This project studied the effects of a trainee pay-for-performance program and quality improvement education at a safety-net hospital. METHODS: In this program, trainees worked with quality improvement faculty, participated in projects aligned with the hospital's priorities, and designed their program-specific project. Each trainee who worked at least 88 days in the institution was eligible to earn $400 for every target achieved for at least six months (maximum of $1,200). RESULTS: Among hospitalwide goals, needlestick injuries per quarter decreased from [mean (standard deviation; SD)] 18 (4.6) to 12 (2.6), 95% confidence interval (CI) = -10.1-1.9, p = 0.02; percentage of excellent provider communication improved from 76.8% to [mean (SD)] 80.5% (2.9), 95% CI = 0.8-8.3, p = 0.08; and mean length of stay for discharged emergency department patients requiring specialist consultation decreased from [mean (SD)] 523 (120) to 461 (40) minutes, 95% CI = -162-37.2, p = 0.11. Among resident-initiated projects, the percentage of Family Medicine patients undergoing colorectal screening increased from 65.1% to [mean (SD)] 67.7% (0.4), 95% CI = 1.7-3.5, p = 0.01; percentage of at-risk patients receiving naloxone at hospital discharge increased from 9% to [mean (SD)] 63% (7.2), 95% CI = 36.1-71.9, p = 0.01; percentage of adolescents screened for chlamydia increased from 34% to [mean (SD)] 55.8% (6.4), 95% CI = 5.9-37.6, p = 0.03; and percentage of high-dose opioid prescriptions following cesarean section decreased from 28% to [mean (SD)] 1.7% (2.9), 95% CI = -33.5 to -19.2, p = 0.001. Eleven of 14 programs achieved three goals. All resident-led goals were met. CONCLUSION: A pay-for-performance improvement program that aligns educational and hospital priorities can provide meaningful experiential learning for trainees and improve patient care.

An inpatient treatment and discharge planning protocol for alcohol dependence: efficacy in reducing 30-day readmissions and emergency department visits.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol dependence results in multiple hospital readmissions, but no discharge planning protocol has been studied to improve outcomes. The inpatient setting is a frequently missed opportunity to discuss treatment of alcohol dependence and initiate medication-assisted treatment, which is effective yet rarely utilized. AIM: Our aim was to implement and evaluate a discharge planning protocol for patients admitted with alcohol dependence. SETTING: The study took place at the San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH), a university-affiliated, large urban county hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Learner participants included Internal Medicine residents at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) who staff the teaching service at SFGH. Patient participants included inpatients with alcohol dependence admitted to the Internal Medicine teaching service. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: We developed and implemented a discharge planning protocol for patients admitted with alcohol dependence that included eligibility assessment and initiation of medication-assisted treatment. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Rates of medication-assisted treatment increased from 0% to 64% (p value < 0.001). All-cause 30-day readmission rates to SFGH decreased from 23.4% to 8.2% (p value = 0.042). All-cause emergency department visits to SFGH within 30 days of discharge decreased from 18.8% to 6.1% (p value = 0.056). DISCUSSION: Through implementation of a discharge planning protocol by Internal Medicine residents for patients admitted with alcohol dependence, there was a statistically significant increase in medication-assisted treatment and a statistically significant decrease in both 30-day readmission rates and emergency department visits.

The impact of Medicaid managed care on hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Medicaid managed care is associated with lower hospitalization rates for ambulatory care sensitive conditions than Medicaid fee-for-service. We also explored whether there was a differential effect of Medicaid managed care by patient's race or ethnicity on the hospitalization rates for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Electronic hospital discharge abstracts for all California temporary assistance to needy families (TANF)-eligible Medicaid beneficiaries less than age 65 who were admitted to acute care hospitals in California between 1994 and 1999. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a cross-sectional comparison of average monthly rates of admission for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions among TANF-eligible Medicaid beneficiaries in fee-for-service, voluntary managed care, and mandatory managed care. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We calculated monthly rates of ambulatory care-sensitive condition admission rates by counting admissions for specified conditions in hospital discharge files and dividing the monthly count of admissions by the size of the at-risk population derived from a separate monthly Medicaid eligibility file. We used multivariate Poisson regression to model monthly hospital admission rates for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions as a function of the Medicaid delivery model controlling for admission month, admission year, patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, and county of residence. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The adjusted average monthly hospitalization rate for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions per 10,000 was 9.36 in fee-for-service, 6.40 in mandatory managed care, and 5.25 in voluntary managed care (p<.0001 for all pairwise comparisons). The difference in hospitalization rates for ambulatory care sensitive conditions in Medicaid fee-for-service versus managed care was significantly larger for patients from minority groups than for whites. CONCLUSIONS: Selection bias in voluntary Medicaid managed care programs exaggerates the differences between managed care and fee-for-service, but the 33 percent lower rate of hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions found in mandatory managed care compared with fee-for-service suggests that Medicaid managed care is associated with a large reduction in hospital utilization, which likely reflects health benefits. The greater effect of Medicaid managed care for minority compared with white beneficiaries is consistent with other findings that suggest that managed care is associated with improvements in access to ambulatory care for those patients who have traditionally faced the greatest barriers to health care.