Post-Hospitalization Home Monitoring Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Results from the Hospital Medicine Re-engineering Network (HOMERuN).

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, hospitals and healthcare systems launched innovative responses to emerging needs. The creation and use of programs to remotely follow patient clinical status and recovery after COVID-19 hospitalization has not been thoroughly described. OBJECTIVE: To characterize deployment of remote post-hospital discharge monitoring programs during the COVID-19 pandemic METHODS: Electronic surveys were administered to leaders of 83 US academic hospitals in the Hospital Medicine Re-engineering Network (HOMERuN). An initial survey was completed in March 2021 with follow-up survey completed in July 2022. RESULTS: There were 35 responses to the initial survey (42%) and 15 responses to the follow-up survey (43%). Twenty-two (63%) sites reported a post-discharge monitoring program, 16 of which were newly developed for COVID-19. Physiologic monitoring devices such as pulse oximeters were often provided. Communication with medical teams was often via telephone, with moderate use of apps or electronic medical record integration. Programs launched most commonly between January and June 2020. Only three programs were still active at the time of follow-up survey. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate rapid, ad hoc development of post-hospital discharge monitoring programs during the COVID-19 pandemic but with little standardization or evaluation. Additional study could identify the benefits of these programs, instruct their potential application to other disease processes, and inform further development as part of emergency preparedness for upcoming crises.

Discharge Practices for COVID-19 Patients: Rapid Review of Published Guidance and Synthesis of Documents and Practices at 22 US Academic Medical Centers.

BACKGROUND: There are currently no evidence-based guidelines that provide standardized criteria for the discharge of COVID-19 patients from the hospital. OBJECTIVE: To address this gap in practice guidance, we reviewed published guidance and collected discharge protocols and procedures to identify and synthesize common practices. DESIGN: Rapid review of existing guidance from US and non-US public health organizations and professional societies and qualitative review using content analysis of discharge documents collected from a national sample of US academic medical centers with follow-up survey of hospital leaders SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We reviewed 65 websites for major professional societies and public health organizations and collected documents from 22 Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) in the US participating in the HOspital MEdicine Reengineering Network (HOMERuN). RESULTS: We synthesized data regarding common practices around 5 major domains: (1) isolation and transmission mitigation; (2) criteria for discharge to non-home settings including skilled nursing, assisted living, or homeless; (3) clinical criteria for discharge including oxygenation levels, fever, and symptom improvement; (4) social support and ability to perform activities of daily living; (5) post-discharge instructions, monitoring, and follow-up. LIMITATIONS: We used streamlined methods for rapid review of published guidance and collected discharge documents only in a focused sample of US academic medical centers. CONCLUSION: AMCs studied showed strong consensus on discharge practices for COVID-19 patients related to post-discharge isolation and transmission mitigation for home and non-home settings. There was high concordance among AMCs that discharge practices should address COVID-19-specific factors in clinical, functional, and post-discharge monitoring domains although definitions and details varied.

Non-Traumatic Spontaneous Spinal Subdural Hematoma in a Patient with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation During Treatment with Rivaroxaban.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous spinal subdural hematoma (SSDH) is a rare but disabling condition, accounting for only 4.1% of all intraspinal hematomas. Risk factors include arteriovenous malformations, coagulopathy, therapeutic anticoagulation, underlying neoplasms, or following spinal puncture. Vitamin K antagonists, antiplatelet agents, and heparinoids have been associated with SSDHs in prior reports. To the best of our knowledge, no cases have reported this association with the factor Xa inhibitor, rivaroxaban, and SSDHs. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a 69-year-old Honduran man with a 5-year history of symptomatic palpitations due to non-valvular atrial fibrillation. He was initially refractory to pharmacologic therapy. He underwent cardioversion in February 2014. After cardioversion, he remained asymptomatic on flecainide. He was anticoagulated on rivaroxaban 20 mg daily without incident since early 2013 until presentation in August 2014. He presented with sudden onset of excruciating upper and lower back pain after minimal movement. This was immediately followed by bilateral lower extremity paresis rapidly progressing to paraplegia with bowel and bladder dysfunction over 15 minutes. Magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated an acute spinal subdural hematoma extending from T3 inferiorly to the conus medullaris. Six months after undergoing cervical and lumbar drainage procedures, he has not recovered bowel, bladder, or lower extremity neurologic function. CONCLUSIONS: Non-traumatic spontaneous spinal subdural hematoma is a rare neurological emergency that may occur during the use of rivaroxaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Physicians should suspect SSDH in patients on rivaroxaban with acute onset of severe back pain and neurologic symptoms to improve the odds of a favorable outcome.

[The discharge process]. / Proceso de alta hospitalaria, revisión de la literatura.

Discharge is one of the most important processes that hospitalized patients must endure. This process is complex, requires coordination among several professionals and transfers an overwhelming amount of information to patients. Often, it is limited to the writing of the discharge summary, with a primary emphasis on the drug list. Since the rise of hospitalism in 1996, a greater emphasis has been placed on understanding this process and in developing interventions to make it more effective and safe. In our country, little is known about how this process is taking place. Probably the absence of financial penalties for readmissions has influenced in the lack of study and development of this process. In the USA the knowledge of the discharge process is well advanced, and several strategies have been developed for reducing adverse events, medication errors, and 30-days readmissions. Other interventions have increased patient satisfaction and the degree of knowledge about their conditions. The aim of this paper is to do a comprehensive review of the literature, to provide healthcare teams with various tools that could improve both the discharge process as well as the discharge summary. The final objective is to optimize the safety and satisfaction of our patients and the hospital metrics of quality.

Proceso de alta hospitalaria, revisión de la literatura / The discharge process

Discharge is one of the most important processes that hospitalized patients must endure. This process is complex, requires coordination among several professionals and transfers an overwhelming amount of information to patients. Often, it is limited to the writing of the discharge summary, with a primary emphasis on the drug list. Since the rise of hospitalism in 1996, a greater emphasis has been placed on understanding this process and in developing interventions to make it more effective and safe. In our country, little is known about how this process is taking place. Probably the absence of financial penalties for readmissions has influenced in the lack of study and development of this process. In the USA the knowledge of the discharge process is well advanced, and several strategies have been developed for reducing adverse events, medication errors, and 30-days readmissions. Other interventions have increased patient satisfaction and the degree of knowledge about their conditions. The aim of this paper is to do a comprehensive review of the literature, to provide healthcare teams with various tools that could improve both the discharge process as well as the discharge summary. The final objective is to optimize the safety and satisfaction of our patients and the hospital metrics of quality.

Hospitalist handoffs: a systematic review and task force recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Handoffs are ubiquitous to Hospital Medicine and are considered a vulnerable time for patient safety. PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for hospitalist handoffs during shift change and service change. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (through January 2007), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Patient Safety Network, white papers, and hand search of article bibliographies. STUDY SELECTION: Controlled studies evaluating interventions to improve in-hospital handoffs (n = 10). DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were abstracted for design, setting, target, outcomes (including patient-level, staff-level, or system-level outcomes), and relevance to hospitalists. DATA SYNTHESIS: Although there were no studies of hospitalist handoffs, the existing literature from related disciplines and expert opinion support the use of a verbal handoff supplemented with written documentation in a structured format or technology solution. Technology solutions were associated with a reduction in preventable adverse events, improved satisfaction with handoff quality, and improved provider identification. Nursing studies demonstrate that supplementing verbal exchange with a written medium leads to improved retention of information. White papers characterized effective verbal exchange, as focusing on ill patients and actions required, with time for questions and minimal interruptions. In addition, content should be updated daily to ensure communication of the latest clinical information. Using this literature, recommendations for hospitalist handoffs are presented with corresponding levels of evidence. Recommendations were reviewed by hospitalists at the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) Annual Meeting and by an interdisciplinary team of expert consultants and were endorsed by the SHM governing board. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic review and resulting recommendations provide hospitalists a starting point from which to improve in-hospital handoffs.

Perioperative cardiac evaluation: assessment, risk reduction, and complication management.

Perioperative cardiac complications are among the most feared outcomes after surgery. Using evidence-based guidelines and expert opinion, physicians can perform a risk assessment and decide whether further cardiac testing, medical therapy, or coronary intervention is necessary to optimize the patient's medical condition prior to surgery. This article reviews the major concepts and recommendations from the ACC guidelines for preoperative cardiac evaluation and perioperative management to reduce risk. Medical management of the major postoperative cardiac complications is also discussed.