Search

BACKGROUND: Potentially preventable admissions are a target for healthcare cost containment. OBJECTIVE: To identify rates of, characterize associations with, and explore physician decision-making around potentially preventable admissions. DESIGN: A comparative cohort study was used to determine rates of potentially preventable admissions and to identify associated factors and patient outcomes. A qualitative case study was used to explore physicians’ clinical decision-making. PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted from the emergency department (ED) to the general medicine (GM) service over a total of 4 weeks were included as cases (N = 401). Physicians from both emergency medicine (EM) and GM that were involved in the cases were included (N = 82). APPROACH: Physicians categorized admissions as potentially preventable. We examined differences in patient characteristics, admission characteristics, and patient outcomes between potentially preventable and control admissions. Interviews with participating physicians were conducted and transcribed. Transcriptions were systematically analyzed for key concepts regarding potentially preventable admissions. KEY RESULTS: EM and GM physicians categorized 22.2% (90/401) of admissions as potentially preventable. There were no significant differences between potentially preventable and control admissions in patient or admission characteristics. Potentially preventable admissions had shorter length of stay (2.1 vs. 3.6 days, p

While many hospitalized patients have orders to fast in preparation for interventions, the extent to which these orders are necessary or adhere to evidence-based durations is unknown. In this study, we analyzed the length, indication, and associated outcomes of nil per os (NPO) orders for general medicine patients at an academic institution in the United States, and compared them to the best available evidence for recommended length of NPO. Of 924 NPO orders assessed, the indicated intervention was not performed for 183 (19.8%) orders, largely due to a change in plan (75/183, 41.0%) or scheduling barriers (43/183, 23.5%). When analyzed by indication, the median duration of NPO orders ranged from 8.3 hours for kidney ultrasound to 13.9 hours for upper endoscopy. For some indications, the literature suggested NPO orders may be unnecessary. Furthermore, in indications for which NPO was deemed necessary in the literature, the duration of most NPO orders was much longer than minimally required. These results suggest the need for establishing more robust practice guidelines or institutional protocols for NPO orders. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:36-39.

Objective To evaluate the frequency and appropriateness of nil per os (nothing by mouth) (NPO) orders and determine the number of meals missed because of these orders among hospitalized patients. Patients and Methods We retrospectively analyzed inpatient NPO orders at an academic institution in the United States. The frequency and duration of NPO orders and the number of meals missed because of these orders were assessed for adult patients admitted to the hospital medicine services from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013, with a hospital stay of 2 or more and 30 or fewer days. Two blinded reviewers assessed if the order could be avoided or the period shortened for a random sample of NPO orders of 120 or more minutes' duration that were written for patients on the general medicine ward. Results A total of 3641 NPO orders were identified. At least one NPO order was placed in 46.6% of the admissions (2211 of 4743). The median duration of NPO orders was 12.8 hours (interquartile range, 9.2-17.3 hours), resulting in 2 (interquartile range, 1-4) missed meals. Of 1130 NPO orders reviewed, 263 (23.3%; 95% CI, 20.9%-25.8%) were deemed avoidable (κ statistic, 0.68), and 482 (42.7%) were unavoidable but led to more missed meals than needed. Taken together, patients could have had 44.8% of the meals (1085 of 2424; 95% CI, 42.8%-46.7%) missed due to NPO orders. Conclusion Approximately half of the patients admitted to the hospital medicine services experienced a period of fasting. One in 4 NPO orders and nearly half of missed meals could have been avoided. Further study is warranted to assess the generalizability of our findings.

Purpose The hospital discharge summary (HDS) serves as a critical method of patient information transfer between hospitalist and primary care provider (PCP). This study was designed to increase our understanding of PCP preferences for, and perceived deficiencies in, the discharge summary. Methods We designed a mail survey that was sent to a random sample of 800 American Academy of Family Physicians members nationally. The survey response rate was 59%. We analyzed the availability of summaries at hospital followup, whether all desired information was contained in the summary and whether certain specific items were completed. Provider subgroup analysis was performed. Results The strongest predictor of discharge summary availability at posthospital followup is direct access to inpatient data. Respondents (27.5%) had a summary available 0% to 40% of the time, 41.4% noted availability 41% to 80% of the time and 31.1% >80% of the time; if a provider had access to inpatient data they tended to have a discharge summary available to them (P 80% of the time. Specific summary items considered "very important" by providers included medication list (94% of respondents), diagnosis list (89%), and treatment provided (87%). Conclusions Opportunities remain in timely delivery of a complete HDS to the PCP. Further multifaceted practice redesign should be directed at optimizing this critical information transfer tool, potentially encompassing electronic medical record utilization and specific training for clinicians preparing summaries. Initial efforts should focus on ensuring availability of a complete summary (containing items deemed important by PCPs including medication list, diagnosis list, and treatment provided) at the posthospital follow-up visit.

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of midnight routine blood draws and assess their impact on test result availability and stat laboratory orders. Methods: We changed the timing of routine blood draws from early morning to midnight on five inpatient wards during the period November 16 to 30, 2011. Results: For the entire institution, of all orders placed each day, laboratory test orders placed from 4:00 to 8:00 am decreased from 55% to 39%, and those placed from 12:00 to 4:00 am increased from 12% to 30%. Stat orders per day decreased during the intervention period (301 ± 53 vs 344 ± 55, P = .04). Morning specimens were more likely to be available by 9:00am (78.1% vs 58.9%, P < .001), and their turnaround time improved by 25.8 minutes (158 vs 184 minutes, P < .001). Patient survey revealed potential preference for midnight blood draws. Conclusions: Midnight is a feasible alternative for the timing of routine blood draws. Redesigning inflow of laboratory orders improved efficiency of laboratory processing and reduced stat orders.

From the Division of Hospital Internal Medicine (A.S., J.S.N.) and Mayo Clinic Historical Unit (R.Z.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; and Section of Educational Affairs (Y.H.) and Department of Endoscopy (K.S.), the Jikei University School of Medicine, Minato, Tokyo, Japan. T wo esteemed physicians on the opposite sides of the world, Kanehiro Takaki in Tokyo, Japan, and William Worrall Mayo in Rochester, Minnesota, each of whom founded a renowned medical center in his country, established a personal link more than a hundred years ago. Their sons, Yoshihiro Takaki and William James Mayo, evolved their friendship into a long-lasting medical interchange between the 2 institutions. In this vignette, we recount their stories and journeys around the globe.

Objective: Multiple large population based observational studies have evaluated the association of various ECG changes with long term adverse outcomes demonstrating conflicting results regarding the significance of right bundle branch block (RBBB). Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prognostic significance of RBBB in healthy population. Methods: This systematic review follows an a priori established protocol and is reported following the PRISMA statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). We systematically searched EMBASE, Web of Science and Scopus through January 2014. We also consulted with content experts to recommend studies for screening. Reviewers working independently and in duplicate screened all eligible abstracts, selecting randomized trials and prospective cohort studies that described all cause mortality or cardiovascular death in patients with RBBB. We excluded studies that reported unadjusted outcome or unadjusted event rates. For statistical analysis, hazard ratios were considered to approximate risk ratios. The main outcomes of the study are all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Results: Based on the eligibility, four large cohorts, with total patient count > 100,000 were included in the meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and included studies were deemed to be of high quality. As demonstrated in Figure 1, RBBB was not associated increase in all-cause mortality (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.89-1.25) or cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.70-1.69). Conclusion: In asymptomatic healthy patients, RBBB is not associated with poor outcome.

We developed and implemented a ‘CPOE-QT Alert’ system, that is, clinical decision support integrated in the computerized physician order entry system (CPOE), in 2011. The system identifies any attempts to order medications with risk of torsade de pointes (TdP) for patients with a history of significant QT prolongation (QTc ≥500 ms) and alerts the provider entering the order. We assessed its impact by comparing orders and subsequent medication administration before and after activation of the system. We found a significant decrease in the proportion of completed order per ordering attempt after system activation (94% (1293/1379) vs 77% (1888/2453), difference 16.8%; p

Background: Although limiting prescription refills is considered as a strategy to increase compliance with the treatment regimen and follow-up, no literature exists to support its effectiveness. We sought to investigate whether decreasing the number of prescription refills affects no-show rate at an urban teaching primary care continuity clinic in New York. Methods: Eight teaching attending physicians and 19 residents implemented a “new prescribing strategy” from February 9 to 22, 2012, which limited the number of refills only to cover until the next intended clinic visit. All adult patient visits were included if follow-up visits were requested to be scheduled within 3 months and prescriptions were given through an electronic prescription system. No-show rates for the first follow-up visits up to 120 days from the initial visits during the interventional period were compared with those during the baseline period (December 15-28, 2011). Results: Two hundred twenty-one patients in the baseline period and 278 in the interventional period were included in the analysis. Median total supply of prescription was 6 and 3 months, respectively ( P < .001). The no-show rates were not significantly different between the 2 periods (19.0% [42/221] vs 16.6% [46/278], P = .5). In multivariate regression analysis, the no-show rate did not change significantly during the interventional period compared with the baseline period (odds ratio [OR] 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-1.5; P = .8). Younger age (OR 1.03 per year, P = .008), male gender (OR 2.0, P = .003), Medicaid or Medicare insurance (OR 3.7, P = .01; OR 4.2, P = .02), and diagnosis of diabetes (OR 1.8, P = .04) or asthma (OR 2.0, P = .03) were associated with higher no-show rates. Conclusions: Reducing the number of refills did not significantly affect no-show rates in the immediate follow-up. Alternative strategies should be considered to minimize no-shows.

Importance: Up to 10% of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have right bundle branch block (RBBB), and RBBB has been associated with a higher risk of mortality. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prognostic significance of RBBB for patients with AMI. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) Data Sources: We have systematically searched Ovid, Scopus and Web of Science through January 2014. Study Selection: Reviewers working independently and in duplicate screened all eligible abstracts, selecting studies that described all-cause mortality or cardiovascular death in patients with RBBB and suspected ACS. We excluded studies that reported unadjusted outcomes. Knowledge synthesis: We pooled risk ratio with hazard ratio in studies reporting those outcomes. When reported, odds ratio was converted into risk ratio using reported event rate in each study’s unexposed -read: non RBBB- group. Main Outcomes: All-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality (death). Results: Eighteen studies were found that reported eligible data. All were observational studies, involving over 89,000 patients. In short-term follow up (up to 30 days), RBBB on presentation was associated with higher all-cause mortality rate, compared to patients without RBBB (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.76-2.82). There was a trend for higher mortality at long-term follow up (range: 6 months-16 years) that did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.93-2.25). Figure-1 demonstrates the forest plot. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and majority of included studied were deemed moderate to high quality. Conclusion and Relevance: RBBB is associated with a more than 2-fold higher risk of all-cause mortality in patients with AMI at 30 days follow up. Patients with AMI and RBBB represent a high risk group for adverse outcomes. A sentence on the differential findings for new vs. old RBBB and association with outcomes could follow here.

Objective To assess the association between off-hour (weekends and nights) presentation, door to balloon times, and mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Data sources Medline in-process and other non-indexed citations, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus through April 2013. Study selection Any study that evaluated the association between time of presentation to a healthcare facility and mortality or door to balloon times among patients with acute myocardial infarction was included. Data extraction Studies’ characteristics and outcomes data were extracted. Quality of studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A random effect meta-analysis model was applied. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I2. Results 48 studies with fair quality, enrolling 1 896 859 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. 36 studies reported mortality outcomes for 1 892 424 patients with acute myocardial infarction, and 30 studies reported door to balloon times for 70 534 patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Off-hour presentation for patients with acute myocardial infarction was associated with higher short term mortality (odds ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.09). Patients with STEMI presenting during off-hours were less likely to receive percutaneous coronary intervention within 90 minutes (odds ratio 0.40, 0.35 to 0.45) and had longer door to balloon time by 14.8 (95% confidence interval 10.7 to 19.0) minutes. A diagnosis of STEMI and countries outside North America were associated with larger increase in mortality during off-hours. Differences in mortality between off-hours and regular hours have increased in recent years. Analyses were associated with statistical heterogeneity. Conclusion This systematic review suggests that patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting during off-hours have higher mortality, and patients with STEMI have longer door to balloon times. Clinical performance measures may need to account for differences arising from time of presentation to a healthcare facility.