[PREVALENCE OF AND POSSIBLE RISK FACTORS FOR PROLONGED HOSPITAL STAY IN DEPARTMENTS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE].

BACKGROUND: Prolonged hospitalization (PH) is associated with increasing rates of complications and cost. OBJECTIVES: To detect and quantify causes and predictors for PH in current practice. METHODS: PH was defined as higher than the 70th percentile of the mean hospitalization duration for each department (two medical departments and one acute geriatric ward). Demographic and clinical data were collected on admission in order to determine predictive factors for PH. Actual causes for PH were tested on the 4th day of hospitalization for all patients by: (1) questioning the patients' attending physicians using a structured questionnaire; (2) assessing the patients' charts using a validated tool. RESULTS: Data were collected during a 5-month study period for all 1092 consecutively admitted patients hospitalized in the three departments in the study of whom 337 (30%) had a PH. In the multivariate analysis we detected the following independent predictors for PH: (1) unmarried patients; (2) dependent-patients; (3) hospitalization in the geriatric versus medical department; (4) an expected high mortality rate according to a validated prediction score; (5) renal failure on admission; (6) prior admission in the previous 6 months. The disease leading to the current admissions was the reason for continued admission on day 4 in the patients with eventual PH in 85% of the cases, as compared to 93% in the control group with regular-duration of hospitalization (p=0.014). On day 4, non-medical reasons for prolonged duration were detected in 7% of those with eventual PH as compared to 1% in the control group (p=0.018). CONCLUSIONS: We already detected demographic and clinical predictors for PH on admission, some of which may be amenable to intervention.

[MONITORING UNITS IN DEPARTMENTS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE: FREQUENCY, IMPACT AND SATISFACTION].

BACKGROUND: Due to increasing numbers of elderly, seriously ill patients and shortage of ICU beds, many hospitals have established monitoring units (MU) in their medical departments. OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess the national prevalence of MUs in medical departments; (2) to determine the outcome of consecutively admitted MU patients; (3) to evaluate patient/ family satisfaction with care. METHODS: The case control study included all 123 patients hospitalized in the MU during a 5-month period, compared with two control groups: (1) 123 patients admitted to medical departments, matched at a ratio of 1:1 by gender, age±10 years and mechanical ventilation; (2) all 52 medical patients treated in the ICU. The main endpoint was 28-day survival. RESULTS: A total of 76/99 (77%) directors of medical departments in Israel responded: 70 (92%) reported the presence of a MU, 64 (92%) have 5-7 beds and 47 (67%) have one nurse per shift. Baseline characteristics of enrolled MU and medical department patients were similar, although 52 medical ICU patients were younger (56±21 vs. 73±14, p<0.001) and had a lower incidence of kidney failure (11.5% vs. 41.5%, p<0.001). The predicted mortality rates were higher for MU patients compared to medical department patients, but 28-day survival rates were similar (64-70%, NS). The questionnaire showed high rates of satisfaction (from 0=low to 5=high): highest with MU care: (4.79±0.48), followed by ICU (4.41±1.06) and lowest for medical department nursing care (4.27±0.84)(p=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring units are ubiquitous in Israeli hospitals and contribute to survival and satisfaction with care.

Assessment and Improvement of Medical Histories: Impact of Focused Feedback.

BACKGROUND: Medical history-taking is an essential component of medical care. OBJECTIVES: To assess and improve history taking, physical examination and management plan for hospitalized patients. METHODS: The study consisted of two phases, pre- and post- intervention. During phase I, 10 histories were evaluated for each of 10 residents, a total of 100 histories. The assessment was done with a validated tool, evaluating history-taking (maximum 23 points), physical examination (23 points), assessment and plan (14 points) (total 60 points). Subsequently, half of these residents were informed that they were assessed; they received their scores and were advised regarding areas needing improvement. Phase II was identical to phase I. The primary endpoint was a statistically significant increase in score. RESULTS: In the study group (receiving feedback after phase I) the physical examination improved from 9.3 ± 2.4 in phase I to 10.8 ± 2.2 in phase II (P < 0.001), while in the control group there was no change (11.3 ± 1.9 to 11.5 ± 1.8 respectively, P = 0.59). The assessment and plan component improved in the study group from 6.4 ± 2.7 in phase I to 7.4 ± 2.6 in phase II (P = 0.05), while no change was observed in the control group (8.2 ± 2.7 and 7.8 ± 2.3, P = 0.43). Overall performance improved in the study group from 30.4 ± 5.1 in phase I to 32.9 ± 4.5 in phase II (P = 0.01), a 10% improvement, while no change was observed in the control group (35.5 ± 6.0 to 34.6 ± 4.1, P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: A review of medical histories obtained by residents, assessed against a validated score and accompanied by structured feedback may lead to significant improvement.

Communication between residents and attending doctors on call after hours.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Off-hours medical care in hospitals is provided by residents, while attendings on call are available for assistance. This study evaluated the gap between residents' expectations and professional guidelines' requirements of attendings on call and what actually occurs during night shifts, while comparing surgical and medical specialties. METHODS: Two questionnaires based on professional guidelines were filled by residents. The first queried about residents' expectations of attendings on call, and the second asked about communication with the attendings during actual night shifts. RESULTS: While 91 (100%) of residents expected the attending on call to be available by phone during the shift, only 44 (48%) expected the attending to initiate contact, and only 17 (19%) expected the attending to visit the ward or emergency department (ED) without being requested to do so. In 127 shifts (84%), some form of communication occurred. Residents called their attendings during 105 shifts (70%). However, attendings initiated contact with residents at the beginning or during the shift in only 67 (44%) and 62 (41%) shifts, respectively, and initiated a visit to the ward/ED during the shift in only 41 cases (27%). Surgical attendings initiated contact in these three ways significantly more frequently than medical attendings [21 (28%) versus 46 (61%), 20 (26%) versus 42 (56%) and 4 (5%) versus 37 (50%), respectively; P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: While communication during night shifts between residents and attendings occurs in most shifts, attendings initiate far less contact with residents than is required by the guidelines.

[Impact of a monitoring unit in the medical department on patient outcome].

PURPOSE: Many hospitals have established monitoring units (MU) in their medical departments, with operating costs that are significantly lower than Intensive Care Units, but with no data on their effectiveness. We determined the outcome of patients, who were treated in a new MU during their hospitalization, compared with that of a control group. METHODS: We included all patients, who were admitted to the MU during a five months period. The control group consisted of patients, who were admitted to medical departments and did not stay in the MU during their hospitalization. Patients and controls were matched according to gender, age +/- 10 years, and need for mechanical ventilation. The main endpoint was the 28-day survival rate. RESULTS: There were minor differences between baseline characteristics of patients and controls. The patient cohort included a higher rate of acute renal failure (20/100, 20%) and chronic renal failure (23/100, 23%), compared to the control group (respectively, 10/100, 10%, p < 0.05 and 8/100, 8%, p < 0.05), and a higher rate of respiratory support (83/94, 82% and 72/99, 72%, p < 0.05). Contrarily, a GLasgow coma scale of 3-5 was found in 10/100 (10%) of MU patients and in 20/100 (20%) of control patients (p < 0.05). Despite these differences, there was no difference in predicted mortality score. Nevertheless, the observed survival rate of patients who stayed in the monitoring unit (76/100, 76%) was higher than that of the control group (64/100, 64%) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pilot study indicate that a monitoring unit may contribute to improved survival.