Article

A requirement to reduce readmissions: take care of the patient, not just the disease.

JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 29.98). 01/2013; 309(4):394-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.233964
Source: PubMed
0 Bookmarks
 · 
33 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Half of all glioblastoma patients are at least 65 years old. The frequency and duration of hospitalization from disease- and treatment-related morbidity in this population are unknown. We performed a retrospective cohort study among patients aged 65 years and older with glioblastoma diagnosed between 1999 and 2007 using SEER-Medicare linked data. Diagnoses and procedures were identified using administrative claims data. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of high hospitalization burden. Among the 5029 patients in the cohort, 52% were ages 65-74, and 52% were male. Twenty-six percent of patients underwent extensive resection, 72% received radiotherapy, and 18% received temozolomide. Median survival was 4.9 months. Among all patients, 21% were hospitalized at least 30 cumulative days between diagnosis and death, and 22% of all patients spent at least one-fourth of their remaining lives as inpatients. Higher comorbidity score (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.72; 95% CI, 1.42-2.07) and black race (AHR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.11-2.18) were associated with an increased risk of being hospitalized for at least 25% of remaining life, whereas radiation (AHR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.42-0.58), temozolomide (AHR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.23-0.42), and extensive surgery (AHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-0.99) were associated with a decreased risk. These data highlight the burden of hospitalization faced by a large proportion of older glioblastoma patients. In the setting of short survival, strategies to reduce the amount of time these patients spend hospitalized are urgently needed, to help maintain quality of life at the end of life.
    Neuro-Oncology 04/2014; · 5.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The landscape of hospital-based care has shifted to place greater emphasis on improving quality and delivering value. In response, hospitals and healthcare organizations must reassess their strategies to improve care delivery in their facilities and beyond. Although these institutional goals may be defined at the executive level, implementation takes place at local sites of care. To lead these efforts, hospitals need to appoint effective leaders at the frontlines. Hospitalists are well poised to take on the role of the local clinical care improvement leader based on their experiences as direct frontline caregivers and their integral roles in hospital-wide quality and safety initiatives. A unit-based leadership model consisting of a medical director paired with a nurse manager has been implemented in several hospitals to function as an effector arm in response to the changing landscape of inpatient care. We provide an overview of this new model of leadership and describe the experiences of 6 hospitals that have implemented it. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2014. © 2014 Society of Hospital Medicine
    Journal of Hospital Medicine 04/2014; 9(8). · 2.08 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To analyse changes in overall readmission rates and disparities in such rates, among patients aged 18-64 (those most likely to have been affected by reform), using all payer inpatient discharge databases (hospital episode statistics) from Massachusetts and two control states (New York and New Jersey). Difference in differences analysis to identify the post-reform change, adjusted for secular changes unrelated to reform. US hospitals in Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey. Adults aged 18-64 admitted for any cause, excluding obstetrical. Readmissions at 30 days after an index admission. After adjustment for known confounders, including age, sex, comorbidity, hospital ownership, teaching hospital status, and nurse to census ratio, the odds of all cause readmission in Massachusetts was slightly increased compared with control states post-reform (odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.04, P<0.05). Racial and ethnic disparities in all cause readmission rates did not change in Massachusetts compared with control states. In analyses limited to Massachusetts only, there were minimal overall differences in changes in readmission rates between counties with differing baseline uninsurance rates, but black people in counties with the highest uninsurance rates had decreased odds of readmission (0.91, 0.84 to 1.00) compared with black people in counties with lower uninsurance rates. Similarly, white people in counties with the highest uninsurance rates had decreased odds of readmission (0.96, 0.94 to 0.99) compared with white people in counties with lower uninsurance rates. In the United States, and in Massachusetts in particular, extending health insurance coverage alone seems insufficient to improve readmission rates. Additional efforts are needed to reduce hospital readmissions and disparities in this outcome.
    BMJ (online) 03/2014; 348:g2329. · 16.38 Impact Factor