Differences in Primary Care Follow-up After Acute Care Discharge Within and Across Health Systems: a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Timely primary care follow-up after acute care discharge may improve outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether post-discharge follow-up rates differ among patients discharged from hospitals directly affiliated with their primary care clinic (same-site), other hospitals within their health system (same-system), and hospitals outside their health system (outside-system). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS: Adult patients of five primary care clinics within a 14-hospital health system who were discharged home after a hospitalization or emergency department (ED) stay. MAIN MEASURES: Primary care visit within 14 days of discharge. A multivariable Poisson regression model was used to estimate adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) and risk differences (aRDs), controlling for sociodemographics, acute visit characteristics, and clinic characteristics. KEY RESULTS: The study included 14,310 discharges (mean age 58.4 [SD 19.0], 59.5% female, 59.5% White, 30.3% Black), of which 57.7% were from the same-site, 14.3% same-system, and 27.9% outside-system. By 14 days, 34.5% of patients discharged from the same-site hospital received primary care follow-up compared to 27.7% of same-system discharges (aRR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.98; aRD - 6.5 percentage points (pp), 95% CI - 11.6 to - 1.5) and 20.9% of outside-system discharges (aRR 0.77, 95% CI [0.70 to 0.85]; aRD - 11.9 pp, 95% CI - 16.2 to - 7.7). Differences were greater for hospital discharges than ED discharges (e.g., aRD between same-site and outside-system - 13.5 pp [95% CI, - 20.8 to - 8.3] for hospital discharges and - 10.1 pp [95% CI, - 15.2 to - 5.0] for ED discharges). CONCLUSIONS: Patients discharged from a hospital closely affiliated with their primary care clinic were more likely to receive timely follow-up than those discharged from other hospitals within and outside their health system. Improving care transitions requires coordination across both care settings and health systems.

Incidence of emergence agitation in children undergoing sevoflurane anesthesia compared to isoflurane anesthesia: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Emergence agitation is a complex syndrome of altered consciousness after emergence from anesthesia. It can result in injury to patients and staff and is associated with other postoperative complications. Sevoflurane has been associated with emergence agitation, potentially due to low tissue solubility and therefore speed of emergence. Prior meta-analyses comparing emergence agitation incidence between sevoflurane and isoflurane anesthetics did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference. Given the publication of additional relevant studies not included in prior meta-analyses as well as improved diagnosis of emergence agitation, we aim to perform an updated, comprehensive meta-analysis comparing emergence agitation incidence between sevoflurane and isoflurane anesthetics in children. METHODS: We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing sevoflurane to isoflurane in children <18 years of age, reporting emergence agitation as an outcome, published before July 2023 using databases and registers. Our primary outcome was the incidence of emergence agitation. Secondary outcomes were time to extubation, awakening time, and length of stay in the postanesthetic care unit. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2. We pooled the effect size for the outcomes using the fixed effects model if we had low heterogeneity, otherwise, we used a random-effects model. RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials (523 children) were included in the final analysis. The incidence of emergence agitation after isoflurane was significantly lower compared to sevoflurane (risk ratio: 0.62 (95% CI: [0.46-0.83]; I2 = 40.01%, p < .001)). Time to extubation, awakening times, and postanesthetic care unit duration were not significantly different. The protective effect of isoflurane compared to sevoflurane remained significant in subgroups of patients who received premedication or intraoperative systemic analgesics (risk ratios: (0.48 [0.28-0.82]; I2 = 60.78%, p = .01), (0.52 [0.37-0.75]; I2 = 0.00%, p < .001), respectively). CONCLUSION: The risk of emergence agitation in children after maintenance anesthesia with sevoflurane is significantly greater than with isoflurane; we did not find evidence of prolonged emergence or postanesthetic length of stay. When possible, isoflurane should be considered for maintenance anesthesia over sevoflurane in patients at high risk of emergence agitation.

Associations of Internal Medicine Residency Milestone Ratings and Certification Examination Scores With Patient Outcomes.

Importance: Despite its importance to medical education and competency assessment for internal medicine trainees, evidence about the relationship between physicians' milestone residency ratings or the American Board of Internal Medicine's initial certification examination and their hospitalized patients' outcomes is sparse. Objective: To examine the association between physicians' milestone ratings and certification examination scores and hospital outcomes for their patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort analyses of 6898 hospitalists completing training in 2016 to 2018 and caring for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries during hospitalizations in 2017 to 2019 at US hospitals. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome measures included 7-day mortality and readmission rates. Thirty-day mortality and readmission rates, length of stay, and subspecialist consultation frequency were also assessed. Analyses accounted for hospital fixed effects and adjusted for patient characteristics, physician years of experience, and year. Exposures: Certification examination score quartile and milestone ratings, including an overall core competency rating measure equaling the mean of the end of residency milestone subcompetency ratings categorized as low, medium, or high, and a knowledge core competency measure categorized similarly. Results: Among 455 120 hospitalizations, median patient age was 79 years (IQR, 73-86 years), 56.5% of patients were female, 1.9% were Asian, 9.8% were Black, 4.6% were Hispanic, and 81.9% were White. The 7-day mortality and readmission rates were 3.5% (95% CI, 3.4%-3.6%) and 5.6% (95% CI, 5.5%-5.6%), respectively, and were 8.8% (95% CI, 8.7%-8.9%) and 16.6% (95% CI, 16.5%-16.7%) for mortality and readmission at 30 days. Mean length of stay and number of specialty consultations were 3.6 days (95% CI, 3.6-3.6 days) and 1.01 (95% CI, 1.00-1.03), respectively. A high vs low overall or knowledge milestone core competency rating was associated with none of the outcome measures assessed. For example, a high vs low overall core competency rating was associated with a nonsignificant 2.7% increase in 7-day mortality rates (95% CI, -5.2% to 10.6%; P = .51). In contrast, top vs bottom examination score quartile was associated with a significant 8.0% reduction in 7-day mortality rates (95% CI, -13.0% to -3.1%; P = .002) and a 9.3% reduction in 7-day readmission rates (95% CI, -13.0% to -5.7%; P < .001). For 30-day mortality, this association was -3.5% (95% CI, -6.7% to -0.4%; P = .03). Top vs bottom examination score quartile was associated with 2.4% more consultations (95% CI, 0.8%-3.9%; P < .003) but was not associated with length of stay or 30-day readmission rates. Conclusions and Relevance: Among newly trained hospitalists, certification examination score, but not residency milestone ratings, was associated with improved outcomes among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries.

Evolving Practice Choices by Newly Certified and More Senior General Internists : A Cross-Sectional and Panel Comparison.

BACKGROUND: Hospital medicine has grown as a field. However, no study has examined trends in career choices by internists over the past decade. OBJECTIVE: To measure changes in practice setting for general internists. DESIGN: Using Medicare fee-for-service claims (2008 to 2018) and data from the American Board of Internal Medicine, practice setting types were measured annually for general internists initially certifying between 1990 and 2017. SETTING: General internists (non-subspecializing) treating Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. PATIENTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with at least 20 evaluation and management (E&M) visits annually. MEASUREMENTS: Practice setting types were defined as hospitalist (>95% inpatient E&M), outpatient only (100% outpatient E&M), or mixed. RESULTS: 67 902 general internists, comprising 80% of all general internists initially certified from 1990 to 2017 (n = 84 581), were studied. From 2008 to 2018, both hospitalists and outpatient-only physicians increased as percentages of general internists (25% to 40% and 23% to 38%, respectively). This was accompanied by a 56% decline in the percentage of mixed-practice physicians (52% to 23%) as these physicians largely migrated to outpatient-only practice. By 2018, 71% of newly certified general internists practiced as hospitalists compared with only 8% practicing as outpatient-only physicians. Most (86% of hospitalists in 2013) had the same practice type 5 years later. This retention rate was similar across early career and more senior physicians (86% and 85% for the 1999 and 2012 initial certification cohorts, respectively) and for the outpatient-only practice type (95%) but was only 57% for the mixed practice type. LIMITATION: Practice setting measurement relied only on Medicare fee-for-service claims. CONCLUSION: Newly certified general internists are largely choosing hospital medicine as their career choice whereas more senior physicians increasingly see patients only in the outpatient setting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: This study did not receive direct funding.

Association of dyspnoea, mortality and resource use in hospitalised patients.

As many as one in 10 patients experience dyspnoea at hospital admission but the relationship between dyspnoea and patient outcomes is unknown. We sought to determine whether dyspnoea on admission predicts outcomes.We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a single, academic medical centre. We analysed 67 362 consecutive hospital admissions with available data on dyspnoea, pain and outcomes. As part of the Initial Patient Assessment by nurses, patients rated "breathing discomfort" using a 0 to 10 scale (10="unbearable"). Patients reported dyspnoea at the time of admission and recalled dyspnoea experienced in the 24 h prior to admission. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, 2-year mortality, length of stay, need for rapid response system activation, transfer to the intensive care unit, discharge to extended care, and 7- and 30-day all-cause readmission to the same institution.Patients who reported any dyspnoea were at an increased risk of death during that hospital stay; the greater the dyspnoea, the greater the risk of death (dyspnoea 0: 0.8% in-hospital mortality; dyspnoea 1-3: 2.5% in-hospital mortality; dyspnoea ≥4: 3.7% in-hospital mortality; p<0.001). After adjustment for patient comorbidities, demographics and severity of illness, increasing dyspnoea remained associated with inpatient mortality (dyspnoea 1-3: adjusted OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.7-2.6; dyspnoea ≥4: adjusted OR 3.1, 95% CI 2.4-3.9). Pain did not predict increased mortality. Patients reporting dyspnoea also used more hospital resources, were more likely to be readmitted and were at increased risk of death within 2 years (dyspnoea 1-3: adjusted hazard ratio 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.6; dyspnoea ≥4: adjusted hazard ratio 1.7, 95% CI 1.5-1.8).We found that dyspnoea of any rating was associated with an increased risk of death. Dyspnoea ratings can be rapidly collected by nursing staff, which may allow for better monitoring or interventions that could reduce mortality and morbidity.

Telehealth Use by Age and Race at a Single Academic Medical Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many ambulatory clinics transitioned to telehealth, but it remains unknown how this may have exacerbated inequitable access to care. OBJECTIVE: Given the potential barriers faced by different populations, we investigated whether telehealth use is consistent and equitable across age, race, and gender. METHODS: Our retrospective cohort study of outpatient visits was conducted between March 2 and June 10, 2020, compared with the same time period in 2019, at a single academic health center in Boston, Massachusetts. Visits were divided into in-person visits and telehealth visits and then compared by racial designation, gender, and age. RESULTS: At our academic medical center, using a retrospective cohort analysis of ambulatory care delivered between March 2 and June 10, 2020, we found that over half (57.6%) of all visits were telehealth visits, and both Black and White patients accessed telehealth more than Asian patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the rapid implementation of telehealth does not follow prior patterns of health care disparities.

How the high acuity unit changes mortality in the intensive care unit: a retrospective before-and-after study.

PURPOSE: High acuity units (HAU) are hospital units that provide patients with more acute care and closer monitoring than a general hospital ward but are not as resource intensive as an intensive care unit (ICU). Nevertheless, the impact of opening a HAU on ICU patient outcomes remains poorly defined. We investigated how the creation of a HAU impacted patient outcomes in the ICU. METHODS: This historical cohort study compared ICU patient in-hospital mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), and hospital LOS before and after the creation of a HAU in a tertiary-care hospital with a medical/surgical ICU between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2017. RESULTS: Data from 4,380 patients (984 in the pre-HAU group and 3,396 in the post-HAU group) were analyzed. In this cohort of ICU patients, 360 (37%) died in the pre-HAU group before the creation of a HAU, and 1,074 (32%) died in the post-HAU group after the creation of a HAU. The creation of a HAU was associated with lower relative risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted risk ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.89; P < 0.001). The creation of a HAU was also associated with reduced ICU and hospital LOS with a 12% increase in the rate of ICU discharge (adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.23; P = 0.02) and a 26% increase in the rate of hospital discharge (adjusted SHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.39; P < 0.001), when accounting for the competing risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the hypothesis that the creation of a HAU may be associated with reduced in-hospital mortality, ICU LOS, and hospital LOS for ICU patients.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les unités de soins intermédiaires sont des départements hospitaliers qui prodiguent des soins plus aigus et un monitorage plus serré aux patients qu'une unité générale, mais qui ne nécessitent pas autant de ressources qu'une unité de soins intensifs (USI). L'impact de l'ouverture d'une unité de soins intermédiaires sur les devenirs des patients à l'USI n'a pourtant été que peu décrit. Nous avons exploré la façon dont la création d'une unité de soins intermédiaires a eu un impact sur les devenirs des patients à l'USI. MéTHODE: Cette étude de cohorte historique a comparé la mortalité hospitalière, la durée de séjour à l'USI et la durée de séjour hospitalier des patients à l'USI avant et après la création d'une unité de soins intermédiaires dans un hôpital de soins tertiaires disposant d'une USI médicale/chirurgicale entre le 1er janvier 2013 et le 31 décembre 2017. RéSULTATS: Les données de 4380 patients (984 dans le groupe pré unité de soins intermédiaires et 3396 dans le groupe post unité de soins intermédiaires) ont été analysées. Dans cette cohorte de patients de l'USI, 360 (37 %) sont décédés avant la création de l'unité de soins intermédiaires, et 1074 (32 %) sont décédés après. La création d'une unité de soins intermédiaires a été associée à un risque relatif plus faible de mortalité hospitalière (risque relatif ajusté, 0,80; intervalle de confiance [IC] 95 %, 0,72 à 0,89; P < 0,001). La création d'une unité de soins intermédiaires a également été associée à une durée de séjour réduite à l'USI et à l'hôpital, avec une augmentation de 12 % du taux de congé de l'USI (rapport de risque ajusté [RRA], 1,12; IC 95 %, 1,02 à 1,23; P = 0,02) et une augmentation de 26 % du taux de congé de l'hôpital (RRA, 1,26; IC 95 %, 1,14 à 1,39; P < 0,001), en tenant compte du risque concurrent de décès. CONCLUSION: Ces données appuient l'hypothèse que la création d'une unité de soins intermédiaires pourrait être associée à une réduction de la mortalité hospitalière, de la durée de séjour à l'USI et de la durée de séjour à l'hôpital pour les patients de l'USI.

Implementation of a Bundled Consent Process in the ICU: A Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVES: A bundled consent process, where patients or surrogates provide consent for all commonly performed procedures on a single form at the time of ICU admission, has been advocated as a method for improving both rates of documented consent and patient/family satisfaction, but there has been little published literature about the use of bundled consent. We sought to determine how residents in an academic medical center with a required bundled consent process actually obtain consent and how they perceive the overall value, efficacy, and effects on families of this approach. DESIGN: Single-center survey study. SETTING: Medical ICUs in an urban academic medical center. SUBJECTS: Internal medicine residents. INTERVENTIONS: We administered an online survey about bundled consent use to all residents. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One-hundred two of 164 internal medicine residents (62%) completed the survey. A majority of residents (55%) reported grouping procedures and discussing general risks and benefits; 11% reported conducting a complete informed consent discussion for each procedure. Respondents were divided in their perception of the value of bundled consent, but most (78%) felt it scared or stressed families. A minority (26%) felt confident that they obtained valid informed consent for critical care procedures with the use of bundled consent. An additional theme that emerged from qualitative data was concern regarding the validity of anticipatory consent. CONCLUSIONS: Resident physicians experienced with the use of bundled consent in the ICU held variable perceptions of its value but raised concerns about the effect on families and the validity of consent obtained with this strategy. Further studies are necessary to further explore what constitutes best practice for informed consent in critical care.

National Trends in Timing of Death Among Patients With Septic Shock, 1994-2014.

OBJECTIVES: To assess trends in timing of mortality among patients with septic shock. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's National Inpatient Sample, 1994-2014. PATIENTS: Hospitalized adults (≥ 18 yr) with International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, Clinical Modification codes consistent with septic shock; secondary analysis: adults with International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, Clinical Modification codes consistent with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and patients with both septic shock and acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: From 1994 to 2014, 48-hour mortality rates decreased among patients with septic shock (21.2% to 10.8%) and septic shock with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (19.1% to 13.4%) but increased among patients with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (7.9% to 9.8%; p value for all trends, < 0.001). Three-to-14-day mortality decreased among patients with septic shock (22.1% to 15.5%), septic shock with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (28.7% to 22.4%) and acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (16.8% to 15.0%; p value for all trends, < 0.001). Mortality after 14 days decreased among all groups (septic shock: 12.6% to 6.7%; septic shock with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation: 20.3% to 11.3%; and acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation: 12.7% to 5.8%; p value for all trends, < 0.001). Cox proportional hazard ratio for declining risk in mortality per year (adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics) was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.96-0.96) for septic shock, 0.97 (0.97-0.97) for acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and septic shock, and 0.99 (0.99-0.99) for acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Septic shock 48-hour, 3-14-day and greater than 14-day mortality declined markedly over two decades; in contrast, patients with acute respiratory failure only experienced marked decreases in greater than 14-day in-hospital mortality rates.

Patient Outcomes After the Introduction of Statewide ICU Nurse Staffing Regulations.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether Massachusetts legislation directed at ICU nurse staffing was associated with improvements in patient outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study; difference-in-difference design to compare outcomes in Massachusetts with outcomes of other states (before and after the March 31, 2016, compliance deadline). SETTING: Administrative claims data collected from medical centers across the United States (Vizient). PATIENTS: Adults between 18 and 99 years old who were admitted to ICUs for greater than or equal to 1 day. INTERVENTIONS: Massachusetts General Law c. 111, § 231, which established 1) maximum patient-to-nurse assignments of 2:1 in the ICU and 2) that this determination should be based on a patient acuity tool and by the staff nurses in the unit. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Nurse staffing increased similarly in Massachusetts (n = 11 ICUs, Baseline patient-to-nurse ratio 1.38 ± 0.16 to Post-mandate 1.28 ± 0.15; p = 0.006) and other states (n = 88 ICUs, Baseline 1.35 ± 0.19 to Post-mandate 1.31 ± 0.17; p = 0.002; difference-in-difference p = 0.20). Massachusetts ICU nurse staffing regulations were not associated with changes in hospital mortality within Massachusetts (Baseline n = 29,754, standardized mortality ratio 1.20 ± 0.04 to Post-mandate n = 30,058, 1.15 ± 0.04; p = 0.11) or when compared with changes in hospital mortality in other states (Baseline n = 572,952, 1.15 ± 0.01 to Post-mandate n = 567,608, 1.09 ± 0.01; difference-in-difference p = 0.69). Complications (Massachusetts: Baseline 0.68% to Post-mandate 0.67%; other states: Baseline 0.72% to Post-mandate 0.72%; difference-in-difference p = 0.92) and do-not-resuscitate orders (Massachusetts: Baseline 13.5% to Post-mandate 15.4%; other states: Baseline 12.3% to Post-mandate 14.5%; difference-in-difference p = 0.07) also remained unchanged relative to secular trends. Results were similar in interrupted time series analysis, as well as in subgroups of community hospitals and workload intensive patients receiving mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: State regulation of patient-to-nurse staffing with the aid of patient complexity scores in intensive care was not associated with either increased nurse staffing or changes in patient outcomes.

Redesigning Rounds in the ICU: Standardizing Key Elements Improves Interdisciplinary Communication.

BACKGROUND: Daily multidisciplinary rounds (MDR) in the ICU represent a mechanism by which health care professionals from different disciplines and specialties can meet to synthesize data, think collectively, and form complete patient care plans. It was hypothesized that providing a standardized, structured approach to the daily rounds process would improve communication and collaboration in seven distinct ICUs in a single academic medical center. METHODS: Lean-inspired methodology and information provided by frontline staff regarding inefficiencies and barriers to optimal team functioning were used in designing a toolkit for standardization of rounds in the ICUs. Staff perceptions about communication were measured, and direct observations of rounds were conducted before and after implementation of the intervention. RESULTS: After implementation of the intervention, nurse participation during presentation of patient data increased from 17/47 (36.2%) to 56/78 (71.8%) (p < 0.0002) in the surgical ICUs and from 8/23 (34.8%) to 107/107 (100%) (p <0.0001) in the medical ICUs. Nurse participation during generation of the daily plan increased in the surgical ICUs from 24/47 (51.1%) to 63/78 (80.8%) (p = 0.0005) and from 7/23 (30.4%) to 106/107 (99.1%) (p < 0.0001) in the medical ICUs. Miscommunications and errors were corrected in nearly half of the rounding episodes observed. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the implementation of a simple toolkit that can be incorporated into existing work flow and rounding culture in several different types of ICUs can result in improvements in engagement of nursing staff and in overall communication.

Variation in Inpatient Consultation Among Older Adults in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Differences among hospitals in the use of inpatient consultation may contribute to variation in outcomes and costs for hospitalized patients, but basic epidemiologic data on consultations nationally are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to identify physician, hospital, and geographic factors that explain variation in rates of inpatient consultation. DESIGN: This was a retrospective observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This work included 3,118,080 admissions of Medicare patients to 4,501 U.S. hospitals in 2009 and 2010. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was number of consultations conducted during the hospitalization, summarized at the hospital level as the number of consultations per 1,000 Medicare admissions, or "consultation density." KEY RESULTS: Consultations occurred 2.6 times per admission on average. Among non-critical access hospitals, use of consultation varied 3.6-fold across quintiles of hospitals (933 versus 3,390 consultations per 1,000 admissions, lowest versus highest quintiles, p < 0.001). Sicker patients received greater intensity of consultation (rate ratio [RR] 1.18, 95% CI 1.17-1.18 for patients admitted to ICU; and RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.18-1.20 for patients who died). However, even after controlling for patient-level factors, hospital characteristics also predicted differences in rates of consultation. For example, hospital size (large versus small, RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.25-1.37), rural location (rural versus urban, RR 0.78, CI 95% 0.76-0.80), ownership status (public versus not-for-profit, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.97), and geographic quadrant (Northeast versus West, RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.12-1.21) all influenced the intensity of consultation use. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals exhibit marked variation in the number of consultations per admission in ways not fully explained by patient characteristics. Hospital "consultation density" may constitute an important focus for monitoring resource use for hospitals or health systems.