Multidisciplinary approach decreases length of stay and reduces cost for ventricular assist device therapy.

Department of Surgery, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin 53792, USA.
Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery (Impact Factor: 1.11). 10/2008; 8(1):84-8. DOI: 10.1510/icvts.2008.187377
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT High implantation costs and long postoperative length of stay (LOS) in debilitated patients complicate ventricular assist device (VAD) therapy. Between July 2000 and February 2005, 30 patients received a VAD at our institution. Of those, 20 patients were successfully discharged from the hospital with VADs. In August 2003, a multidisciplinary team was formed consisting of all services for VAD patients to replace a single-discipline (cardiac surgery) system. This team evaluated potential VAD candidates and identified optimal timing for implantation. These 20 VAD patients were divided into two groups according to the initiation of multidisciplinary team; the traditional group (n=7, July 2000-July 2003) and the multidisciplinary group (n=13, August 2003-February 2005). Patient demographics were not different. The LOS decreased from 61 to 15 days (P<0.01), especially LOS on the floor decreased from 35 to 7 days (P=0.03). The floor cost was significantly reduced ($47,111 vs. $8742, P<0.01), leading to a decrease in total postoperative cost ($202,238 vs. $161,744, P<0.01). The 30-day readmission rate decreased (5/7 patients vs. 1/13 patients, P<0.01). A multidisciplinary approach significantly decreased LOS and cost after VAD therapy, mostly by decreasing the cost of routine non-ICU care, without increasing the readmission rate.


Available from: Maryl R Johnson, Nov 01, 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this evidence-based practice improvement project was to improve patients' blood glucose control after cardiac surgery, specifically aiming to keep blood glucose levels less than 200 mg/dL.
    Clinical nurse specialist CNS 07/2014; 28(4):240-6. DOI:10.1097/NUR.0000000000000056 · 0.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The number of heart failure (HF) patients living with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as destination therapy is increasing. Successful long-term LVAD support includes a high degree of self-care by the patient and their caregiver, and also requires long-term support from a multidisciplinary team. All three components of self-care deserve special attention once an HF patient receives an LVAD, including activities regarding self-care maintenance (activities related both to the device and lifestyle), self-care monitoring (e.g., monitoring for complications or distress), and self-care management (e.g., handling alarms or coping with living with the device). For patients to perform optimal self-care once they are discharged, they need optimal education that focuses on knowledge and skills through a collaborative, adult learning approach.
    Current Heart Failure Reports 05/2014; 11(3). DOI:10.1007/s11897-014-0201-0
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: CO-CHAIRS: Feldman D: Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Georgia Institute of Technology and Morehouse School of Medicine; Pamboukian SV: University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Teuteberg JJ: University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania TASK FORCE CHAIRS: Birks E: University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky; Lietz K: Loyola University, Chicago, Maywood, Illinois; Moore SA: Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Morgan JA: Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan CONTRIBUTING WRITERS: Arabia F: Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona; Bauman ME: University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada; Buchholz HW: University of Alberta, Stollery Children's Hospital and Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Deng M: University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Dickstein ML: Columbia University, New York, New York; El-Banayosy A: Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania; Elliot T: Inova Fairfax, Falls Church, Virginia; Goldstein DJ: Montefiore Medical Center, New York, New York; Grady KL: Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; Jones K: Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; Hryniewicz K: Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota; John R: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Kaan A: St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Kusne S: Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona; Loebe M: Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas; Massicotte P: University of Alberta, Stollery Children's Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Moazami N: Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Mohacsi P: University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland; Mooney M: Sentara Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Nelson T: Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona; Pagani F: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Perry W: Integris Baptist Health Care, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Potapov EV: Deutsches Herzzentrum Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Rame JE: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Russell SD: Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland; Sorensen EN: University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland; Sun B: Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Strueber M: Hannover Medical School, Hanover, Germany INDEPENDENT REVIEWERS: Mangi AA: Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Petty MG: University of Minnesota Medical Center, Fairview, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Rogers J: Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
    The Journal of heart and lung transplantation: the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation 02/2013; 32(2):157-87. DOI:10.1016/j.healun.2012.09.013 · 5.61 Impact Factor